THE POPULATION OF THE PHILIPPINES - CICREDcicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-c42.pdfPreface AN...

1974World Population Year

THE POPULATIONOF

THE PHILIPPINES

CI.CR.ED. Series

POPULATIONOF THE PHILIPPINES

Population Institute

University of the Philippines

Mercedes B. Concepción

Editor

Population of the PhilippinesPrepared by the Population Institute,University of the Philippines,Republic of the Philippines.

Copyright 1977Population Institute, University of the PhilippinesManila, Philippines

Preface

AN ANALYSIS of the population situation in thePhilippines was first undertaken in 1965 utilizingavailable census information and inadequate vitalstatistics. Since then, the country has undertaken twodemographic surveys on a nationwide scale, the first in1968 and the second in 1973. These surveys were carriedout by the University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute (UPPI) with the collaboration of the thenBureau of the Census and Statistics—now known as theNational Census and Statistics Office (NCSO)—withfunds provided by the Ford Foundation and the UnitedStates Agency for International Development (USAID)respectively. Based on these data, several countryreports have been written for various purposes. Thelatest attempt, which appears in subsequent pages, wasprepared as a contribution to furthering the objectivesof World Population Year, 1974.

The authors of the individual chapters are all staffmembers of the Population Institute. Their contribu-tions represent a concerted effort in putting togetherdata from various sources and interpreting them in thelight of the peculiar setting that is the Philippinearchipelago. Other monographs will no doubt be writtenin the future as data sources expand and provide moreaccurate information on the dynamics of humannumbers.

It is hoped that the present analysis will introduce thereader to Philippine population facts and figures andlead him to an understanding of their implications foroverall development.

As is usual in any group endeavor, acknowledgment ismade to all the authors and to their research assistantsfor the analyses presented in this monograph and toMrs. Socorro Garcia-Roque whose devotion to theInstitute's concerns has made this printed version areality.

MERCEDES B. CONCEPCIÓNDean, UPPI

Contents

Population Growth 1by Aurora E. Perez

Components of Growth 9by Elíseo A. De Guzman

Population Composition 35by Elíseo A. De Guzman

Population Distribution 61by Aurora E. Perez

Labor Force 95by Imelda A. Zosa

Population Policy and Family Planning 115by Mercedes B. Concepción

Population Projections 129by Dionisia R. delà Paz

Social and Economic Implicationsof Population Growth 143by Ernesto M. Pernia

Tables and Figures

Population GrowthTable 1. Population Growth

in the Philippines,1591-1975 7

Figure 1. Population Growthin the Philippines,1591-1975 ; 7

Components of GrowthTable 1. Estimates of the Crude

Birth Rate, 1903-70 11Table 2. Average Number of Children

Ever Born per Ever-Married Woman; 1939-73 12

Table 3. Fertility Indices forThree Five-Year Periods,1958-72 13

Table 4. Age-Specific Marital FertilityRates for All Womenof Various Birth Cohorts(Rates per 1000 marriedwomen as of 1973) 15

Table 5. Average Number of MaritalLive Births Before and AfterAge 35 for Birth Cohorts ofEver-Married Women Aged35-39; Philippines 1973 16

Table 6. Indices of Marriage Patternfor Females, 1903, 1939,1960, and 1970: 45 Provinces 18

Table 7. Fertility Ratios of Women25-29 by SelectedCharacteristics, 1968 and 1973 20

Table 8. Estimated Crude Death Ratesfor the Philippines, 1903-71 26

Table 9. Crude Death Rates byMajor Regions: 1973 27

Table 10. Death Rates byLeading Causes: 1946-72 29

Population CompositionTable 1. Enumerated Male and Female

Populations of the Philippinesand Sex Ratios for Census Years 36

Table 2. Sex Ratios of the Populationby Age Group, 1903-70 36

Table 3. Sex Ratios by Regions and byBroad Age Groups, 1970 37

Table 4. Sex Ratios by RegionalDivisions and byResidence, 1970 38

Table 5. Percentage Distribution byAge Group, 1903-70. 39

Table 6. Population of the Philippinesby Age and Sex as Reportedin 1960 and 1970 Censusesand Per Cent Change(Population in Thousands) 40

Table 7. Percentage Distribution ofthe Philippine Population bySex and Residence, 1970 41

Table 8. Age Structure of thePopulation by Region, 1970 42

Table 9a. Percentage Distribution ofPersons Aged 15 and Over byAge, Sex, and MaritalStatus: Philippines, 1960 44

Table 9b. Percentage Distribution ofPersons Aged 15 and Overby Age, Sex, and MaritalStatus: Philippines, 1973 45

Table 10. Percents of Females Single byAge, and Singulate MeanAge at Marriage: 1903-73 46

Table 11. Proportions Single and SingulateMean Age at Marriage (SMAM)by Age, Sex, and by Region, 1973 48

Table 12. Percentage Distribution ofHouseholds by Number ofPersons, 1968 and 1973 50

Table 13. Percentage Distribution ofHouseholds by Family Typeand Residence, 1968 and 1973 51

Table 14. Percentage Distribution ofHouseholds by Age and Place ofResidence of Household Heads,1968 and 1973 53

Table 15. Percentage Distribution ofPopulation with College Degreesby Sex and Major Field ofStudy, 1970 55

Table 16. Distribution of Population byReligion and Per CentChange: 1960 and 1970 57

Population DistributionTable 1. Sex Ratios by Broad Age-Groups

and Locale, 1970 66Table 2. Rates (Percentages) and

Rank-Order of In-Migration,Out-Migration, andNet Migration,Birth-to-1960, inthe Philippines, by Regions 73

Table 3. Rates (Percentages) andRank-Order of In-Migration,

Out-Migration, and NetMigration 1960-to-1970, in thePhilippines, by Regions 74

Table 4. Index of Effectiveness ofSelected Migration StreamsBefore and After 1960 76

Table 5. Index of Effectiveness ofMigration Streams, Birth-to-1965 and 1965-to-1973, By Sexand Type of Migration Flow 77

Table 6. Age-Specific Sex Ratios by Typeof Stream for LifetimeMigrants, Birth-to-1965 79

Table 7. Percentage Distribution andRank-Order of MigrationStreams for Two Intervals:Lifetime, Birth-to-1965 andPeriod, 1965-to-1973 80

Table 8. Age-Specific Sex Ratios of.Migration Streams for PeriodMigrants, 1965-to-1973 81

Table A. Population, Land Area andDensity of the Philippinesby Region: Censal Years1960 and 1970 84

Table B. Indicators of MigrationVolume and Pattern by Regionof Residence in 1970 85

Table C. Lifetime and Period MigrationBetween Less Developed andMore Developed Regions inthe Philippines: Birth-to-1960and 1960-to-1970 86

Figure 1. Density Map of the Philippinesby Regions 87

Figure 2. Age-Sex Distribution ofPhilippine Population in theUrban and Rural Sectors, 1970 88

Figure 3. Volume of Lifetime Migration,

Birth-to-1960 in the PhilippineRegions: 1960 Census 89

Figure 4. Volume of Period Migration,1960-to-1970 in PhilippineRegions: 1970 Census 90

Figure 5. Types of Migration Streamsin the Philippines Before andAfter 1965 91

Labor Force

Table 1. Population and Labor Force in1960 and 1970 96

Table 2. Male and Female Labor ForceParticipation 97

Table 3. The Labor Force 10 Years Oldand Over Who Were Employedand Unemployed, 1960-70 102

Table 4. Trends in Industry of theEmployed Labor ForcePhilippines, 1960-70. 105

Table 5. Trends in Industry Groups ofthe Employed Male LaborForce, 1960-70 106

Table 6. Trends in Industry Groups ofEmployed Female Labor Force1960-70 107

Table 7. Trends in Occupation of theEmployed Labor Force,Philippines, 1960-70 108

Table 8. Occupations of EmployedMales, 1960-70 109

Table 9. Occupations of EmployedFemales, 1960-70 110

Table 10. Trends in Class of Workersof the Employed LaborForce, Philippines, 1960-70 I l l

Figure 1. Age-Specific Labor Force Par-ticipation Rates, 1960 and 1970 99

Figure 2. Age-Specific Labor Force

Participation of Urban andRural Areas, 1970 100

Figure 3. The Structure of Unemploy-ment, May 1970 Census,Philippines 104

Population Policy and Family Planning

Table 1. Eligible Population, Numberof Acceptors and Users, 1970-77- 120

Table 2. Two-Year First Method andAll-Method ContinuationRates and Failure RatesPhilippines, 1970-72 122

Table 3. Trend in Contraceptive Method Mix:FY 1971-75 (Adjusted Figures) 123

Population Projections

Table 1. Projected Male and FemalePopulations by Five-YearAge Groups and by Five-YearIntervals, 1970-2000 (000's) 133-135

Table 2. Projected Total Populationand Per Cent Increase:Philippines, 1970-2000 136

Table 3. Population Density as Estimatedfrom the Various PopulationProjections: Philippines,1970-2000 137

Table 4. Structure of the PhilipinePopulation (In Percentages)by Broad Age Groups, 1970-2000 138

Table 5. Dependency Ratios Accordingto Various Population Pro-jections for the Philip-pines, 1970-2000 139

THE GROWTH OFPOPULATION

AURORA E. PEREZ

THE PHILIPPINES, a cluster of islands strung 500 miles offthe southeast coast of Asia, has Japan, Korea, andTaiwan to the north, Vietnam and Thailand to the west,and Borneo to the south. The China Sea lies on the westand north, the Sea of Celebes and the coastal waters ofBorneo on the south, and the Pacific Ocean along theeastern seaboard. The archipelago's 7,100 islands (ap-proximate) are scattered over 1,152 miles from north tosouth and measure 688 miles at the widest point, fromeast to west. Philippine territorial jurisdiction extendsover 300,000 square kilometers or 116,000 square miles.

A glance at current distribution maps shows a heavyconcentration of people in the two largest major islands,Luzon (central and northern areas), and Mindanao far,down south. Each has an area of more than 1,000square miles, and their individual populations geographi-cally present a pattern of population built-up areas,resulting in population densities exceeding the nationallevel.

Compared to other countries, the Philippines has avery high density. As of 1975, around 140 persons werefound in every square kilometer, and in mid-1975, theNational Census and Statistics Office (NCSO) estimatedthat density will be between 239 and 322 persons per squarekilometer at the turn of the century.

1

2 THE GRO WTH OF POPULA TION

Geographical Structure. Despite territorial fragmenta-tion and great diversity in size among the islands, acommon geographical structural foundation is evident.A mountainous spine, from 3,600 to 6,000 feet high,extends longitudinally through the country. Flanking themountain ranges are zones of rolling uplands andfoothills that descend toward the sea. Narrow sprawlinglowlands parallel the coasts. This explains the agricul-tural base of the nation's economy. (Of the totalemployed, more than half are found performingagricultural activities while close to two-fifths areengaged in non-agricultural tasks.) However, abundantnatural resources have yet to be tapped; of 17.2 millionhectares of arable land, only 41 percent is farmed. As acountry well endowed with natural resources, thePhilippines has still to realize its vast potential.

Climate. The climate is tropical, marked by mildtemperatures varying from 60°F to 100°F. It seems thatan opportune combination of warm-sea insularity andlow latitude has blessed the archipelago with mild anduniform temperature. There are two marked seasons—the dry and the wet—which generally vary in duration.Common observation pegs the dry season from Marchto June while the wet season, abetted by the monsoon,extends from July to October. The most agreeable timeof year is from November through February withpleasant sunny days and cool nights.

Administrative Divisions. The country's basic politicalgeography reflects the reorganization of populationdistribution directly attributable to Spanish missionaryefforts in colonial times. Ordinarily, there is a spatialhierarchy of at least three or four levels of magnitudefor the areal subdivisions (usually administrative units)for which population data are derived and published. Asestablished by the Spanish conquerors, the pyramid of

Perez

areal units consists of the following, in ascending order:barrios, poblaciones (or city districts), municipali-ties, cities, provinces, and regions.1 At the top of thepyramid is the primary civil division,the region, and thepyramid is subdivided further until it reaches the broadbase, the small locality.

These units still survive today and have increased innumber. As of May 6, 1970 the entire country had 67provinces, 59 cities, 1,445 municipalities or townsgrouped into 11 regions. Changes in physical boundariesand annexations in recent times, however, have increasedthe number of provinces to 73 and cities to 60 (NCSO,1975).

Population before 1900

Pre-Colonization. Traditional Filipino villages dottedthe narrow island coasts in pre-colonial times, a legacyof Malay sea migration into the country. Most of thesmaller islands remained uninhabited, as the nativepopulation was very sparse. Plasencia (1909) notes thatmost villages were nothing more than 30 to 100 houses,with populations that commonly varied between 100 to500 persons (Plasencia, 1909).

^Theareal units which constitute the spatial hierarchy are defined as follows: abarrio is the smallest recognizable political area; a población is usually the centerof a municipality and is commonly the site of the administrative governmentagencies; the city and the municipality are the autonomous units that make upa"province," derived from the Spanish word provincia. The province is thelarger administrative subdivision, which when grouped together based ongeographic proximity and socio-economic integration, form a "region."

^"Barangay" isa small kinship group of 30 to 100 families which was the basicunit of political and social organization in the pre-Hispanic period. It was alsoused to identify a slender boat, tapered at both ends and held together bywooden pegs. Its revival as a basic unit of organization today was effectedthrough a reformatory movement of the country's New Society under martiallaw. There are approximately 42,000 barangay units in the country today.

4 THE GRO WTH OF POPULA TION

Spanish narratives, however, reveal a tremendousrange in barangay 2 size; some were tiny hamlets of only20 to 30 people. Most communities rimming the narrowVisayan coasts then were merely villages of eight to tenhouses (Loarca, 1909). A handful were "giants."Manila had about 2,000 inhabitants and Cebu was onlyslightly smaller. The settlement of Cainta, located eastof Manila, had 1,000 persons. Several agglomerations of700 to 1,000 members were also reported in Mindanao.

Period of Colonization. At the start of the Spanishconquest, total Philippine population exceeded three-quarters of a million. The first census of Spanishtributos (taxpayers) totaled 166,903. It was estimatedthat each tributo represented the taxpayer and threedependents. Based upon an average family size of fourpersons, a total of 667,612 souls were registered in the"Relación de las Encomiendas"3 in 1591. At the timeof enumeration, Spanish sovereignty was confined to thelowlands of Luzon and the Visayas. Early chroniclersestimated an additional 75,000 to 150,000 persons in theheavily forested mountains of the islands north ofMindanao.

The war between Spain and Holland, forced labor,and epidemics of cholera, smallpox, and influenza thenraging through the Islands severely slashed Philippinepopulations in the early part of the 17th century. Theearliest cholera epidemic recorded was in Manila (about1628); by 1655, population was estimated at 510,000.The 1880s witnessed another tragic epidemic thatclaimed about 1,300 lives a day. Worcester (1899)

^This is a report to King Philip II of Spain executed by Gov. GomezPerez Dasmariñas. An encomienda was defined as a privilege from theSpanish Crown to deserving colonists to collect taxes or tributes from thepopulation residing within the specific area. In return these grantees werecharged with the spiritual and temporal care of their wards. Theencomienda system generated our first moderately accurate reports, astaxes were assessed according to population.

Perez

reported 15,000 to 20,000 deaths caused by epidemicdiseases. The country, however, experienced incrementsto its population during the succeeding years.

The first official enumeration of the population wastaken in 1877. Royal decrees issued at decennialintervals instructed that similar censuses be taken. Thecensus enumeration of 1877 recorded the population at5,567,685. Following counts until the beginning of the20th century registered minimal increments. A notabledecrease from the initial census enumeration of 1877was observed in 1897. Estimates of population wereplaced at 5,490,229. History states that the last of theSpanish civil censuses was only partially completedand the returns ruined during the troubled years thatfollowed.

Population after 1900

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, sevenpopulation enumerations have been undertaken.

After Spain ceded the Philippines to the Americans atthe close of the nineteenth century, the U.S. governmentconducted three enumerations: the first in 1903, thesecond in 1918, and the last in 1939. Followingindependence and upon installation of its own govern-ment, the country carried out its first official census in1948, followed by the one in 1960 and another in 1970.The most recent enumeration, in May 1975, for the firsttime sought data on the people's means of livelihood-an important factor in development.

In 1903, the Philippines had 7,635,426 persons.Comparing this figure with that of 1877, an increase ofabout 37 per cent was recorded for the interval of 26years. The annual growth rate then was about 1.3 percent. Completion of the second census in 1918 revealed

6 THE GROWTH OF POPULA TION

an incremental 1.9 per cent in the annual rate ofincrease over that of the previous census. By 1939,population reached a total of 16,000,303, indicating anaccelerated rate of increase attributable mainly toimproved health and sanitary conditions, increased foodproduction, better diets, and in general, the widespreadeducation of the people. The data on population in 1939indicated a 2.2 per cent annual rate of increase.

After 1939, population growth declined somewhat, asa result of the internal disorder that characterized theperiod. There was the war fought against the Japanesein the early 1940s; the ensuing years of struggle resultedin substantial loss of manpower. Two years after gainingindependence in 1946, the country's population num-bered 19,234,182. The annual growth rate for the period1939-1948 was 1.9 per cent, a level wrought by the war'sdestruction.

In 1960, some 7,853,503 persons, were added to the1948 count, an increase which was more than twice theincrease of the preceding census years. Even morepronounced was the growth which occurred during thefollowing intercensal period 1960-1970 (see Table 1).The average annual growth rate of 3.01 per cent duringthe decade, representing an additional 9.6 millionpersons, gave the Philippines the 16th largest populationin the world, ranking her 7th in Asia (Figure 1).

Like most developing countries in the Southeast Asianregion, the Philippines today has not yet resolved theproblem of rapid population growth. In a preliminaryreport on the census held May 1, 1975, the NCSOestimated the total population at 41,831,045. Based onthis estimate, the annual growth rate may havedecreased to 2.7 per cent per year but has not, as yet,gone down to a level that would ensure minimumgrowth, least of all attain a level of replacement. Aswith other social problems, the solution to this runawaypopulation growth will not be difficult as long as

Perez

recognition of the problem and the necessary action istaken right now.

table 1. Population Growth in the PhiUppines: 1591-1975

Year

159118001877188718961903191819391948196019701975

Population

667,6121,561,2515,567,6855,984,7276,261,3397,635,426

10,314,31016,000,30319,234,18227,087,68536,684,48641,831,045'

AbsoluteChange

893,6394,006,434

417,042276,612

1,374,0872,678,8845,685,9933,233,8797,853,5039,596,8015,146,559

Per centChange

133.86256.62

7.494.62

21.9535.0855.1320.2140.8335.4314.03

AverageAnnual Growth

4.0731.6670.7250.5032.8751.8972.2191.9063.0573.0122.660

SOURCE: Censo de las Islas Filipinas, 1903. Tomo 1; Bureau of Census andStatistics, "Census of the Philippines: 1960," Vol. II; Bureau of theCensus and Statistics, "Total Population of the Philippines and EachProvince, Municipality and Municipal District: 1970"; NationalCensus and Statistics Office, Preliminary Report of 1975 Census.

1Preliminary figures based on hand tallies.

;Yor

UlliFIGURE I: POPULATION GROWTH IN THE PHILIPPINES: 1591-1973

8 THE GRO WTH OF POPULATION

REFERENCES

"Population Trends Shift." Bulletin Today, February16, 1976 issue.

Loarca, Miguel de (1909) "Relación de las YslasFilipinas, Arevalo, June 1582." In Blair, Emma Helenand Robertson, James Alexander. The PhilippineIslands, 1493-1898. The Arthur H. Clark Company,Cleveland, Vol. 5, pp. 34-188.

National Census and Statistics Office 1975) IntegratedCensus of the Philippine Population and Its EconomicActivities, 1975.

Plasencia, Juan de, O.S.F. (1909) "Customs of theTagalogs, Manila: October 1589." In Blair, EmmaHelen and Robertson, James Alexander, The Philip-pine Islands, 1493-1898. The Arthur H. ClarkCompany, Cleveland. Vol. 7, pp. 173-198.

Worcester, Dean C. (1899) The Philippine Islands andTheir People. The Macmillan Company, New York.

COMPONENTSOF GROWTH

ELÍSEO A. DE GUZMAN

POPULATION GROWTH in the Philippines stems mainlyfrom the interaction between the level of fertility andthe level of mortality. While data on internationalmigration are scarce, available information shows thatemigration and immigration are as yet inconsequentialelements in the nation's population growth rate.

The determination of fertility and mortality trendsand levels in the country is greatly hampered by theinadequacy of birth and death statistics. Despite effortsto improve the present civil registration system, govern-ment agencies still report suspiciously low birth anddeath rates. Severe under-registration renders vitalstatistics of little value in the analyses of national orregional levels and trends of fertility and mortality.

In contrast to a decade ago, a large amount of ratherdetailed fertility information has become available in thecountry, brought about by a number of fertility surveysconducted on the national as well as local level.Unfortunately, this has not happened in the case of dataon mortality. Most of the plausible mortality estimatesthat exist are on the national level; there is very littleinformation on sub-national populations.

In the absence of accurate vital statistics, fertility andmortality parameters are estimated from census data byapplying indirect methods of estimation. Local andnational demographic surveys like the 1968 and 1973

10 COMPONENTS OF GROWTH

National Demographic Surveys permit a more detailedanalysis of fertility, and sometimes of mortality, levelsand trends on the national and regional levels as well asfor other sub-groups of the population.

Fertility

Available estimates of the birth rate show thatPhilippine fertility has been and still is characteristicallyhigh—well above the level of pre-industrial Europe andprobably above that of many Asian countries. The highlevel of fertility allowed population to grow at agradually rising pace during the 19th century, even withthe very slow progress achieved in the control ofdiseases. It is possible that improvements in health careduring the last half-century brought a slight rise in thenumbers of children born alive per woman livingthrough the fecund years by lowering the proportion ofyoung widows and pre-natal losses.

Crude birth rate. As a measure of fertility, the crudebirth rate has certain limitations since it is affected bythe age composition of the population. For lack of data,however, the fertility in the Philippines for early datescan only be assessed by computing the crude birth rate.

The earliest period for which serious fertility estimatesat the national level are available covers the yearsimmediately preceding and just following the Philippine-American military conflict (1899-1902). Crude birthrates as high as 53.7 per thousand were registered and"the rates are probably very nearly accurate for thepopulations represented" (Smith, 1975).

Undoubtedly, the birth rate fluctuated under differentcircumstances in the past. The birth rate was fairlyconstant during the first five decades of the present

de Guzman 11

century as evidenced by the range of crude birth ratesbetween 1903 and 1948 (50 to 56 per 1000 population).There may have been some reduction of fertility duringthe second World War. The proportion of childrenreported as under five years of age in 1948 (15.5 percent) was 1.2 points less than in 1960 (16.7 percent).This apparent rise from 1948 to 1960 may have been duein part to a reduction in the level of infant mortality.

Estimates of the crude birth rate for the early sixtiesrange from 42.0 per thousand to 45.6 per thousandpopulation. The birth rate .was estimated to lie between40.0 and 42.7 per thousand in 1970.

Fertility ratios. The most important direct informationon fertility is provided by the number of children everborn to ever-married women of specified ages prior to

Table 1. Estimâtes of the

Estimate

de GuzmanAdams, et. al.de GuzmanMadigan-AvanceñaLorimerSmithde Guzman

Crade Birth Rate,

Period

1903-19481939-19481948-19601954-19601960196019601960-19701970

1903-1970

Crude Birth Rate(Per Thousand)

50.0-55.845.6-52.746.8-51.944.245.642.0-43.442.7-44.040.8-45.240.0-42.7

SOURCES: Adams, Edith, "New Population Estimates for the Philippines,1948-1962," The Philippine Statistician 7:134-166; de Guzman,Elíseo A., "Estimates of the Philippine Birth Rate: A CensusAnalysis," Research Note No. 58, University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute, 1975; Lorimer, Frank, "Analysis and Pro-jections of the Population of the Philippines," First Conferenceon Population, 1965, Quezon City, 1966; Smith, Peter, C ,"Philippine Regional and Population Differentials in Marriageand Family Building: 1960," Philippine Sociological Review 19(3-4): 159-181.


the time of an inquiry. Data of this type are availablefrom censuses and national surveys. Table 2 shows theaverage number of children ever born per ever-marriedwoman for selected age groups for various years.

It is evident that the data for most years are subjectto error. With the exception of the 1956 and 1958results, the numbers of children reported as ever born tothe older ever-married women at each successive age arelower than those reported by women in the ages 40-44.

If it is assumed that the cumulative fertility ratios forthe age group 40-44 are equal or nearly equal to thecompleted level, then there is no evidence of fertilitydecline among married women in recent years. Decreasein fertility is reflected in the children ever born permarried woman only when a downward trend is wellestablished.Table 2. Average Number of Children Ever Born Per Ever-Married Woman,

1939-1973

AgeGroups

15-1920-2425-29 130-34 J35-39 ]40-44 J45-49 150-54 /55-59 \60-64 J65 +

1939 |

**

3.99 |

6.12 j

6.49J

6.23 )

5.84

*Not available

SOURCES

1948

**

5.91

6.38 |

6.35]

6.15

: 1939: Bureau

Y

1956

*•

3.444.766.026.93

7.30

7.22

6.87

of the

E

| 1958

**

3.45.1

•>

6.3

• 7.3

Census

A

| 1960

0.871.873.274.685.69 16.45 ,6.386.185.935.99

*

R

1963

**

3.234.56

5.94m

*

*

*

*

*

and Statistics, 1939

1968

1.111.843.184.585.686.246.225.855.836.06

*

1973

0.841.853.144.485.686.546.415.986.365.775.89

Census; 1948:Bureau of the Census and Statistics, 1948 Census; 1956:Lorimer, Frank, "Analysis and Projections of the Population ofthe Philippines," First Conference on Population, 1965; 1958:Bureau of the Census and Statistics, 1960 Census; 1963: BCS,May, 1963, May 1963 PSSH; 1968: 1968 National Demogra-phic Survey; 1973: 1973 National Demographic Survey.

de Guzman 13

Age-specific fertility rates. The overall age-specificfertility rates and the age-specific marital fertility ratesfor the five-year periods 1958-62, 1963-67 and 1968-72from the 1973 National Demographic Survey are shownin Table 3.

The age-specific fertility rates for all women (Cols.2-4) show an indication of a declining fertility. Whenthe rates for 1958-62 are compared with thpse for1968-72, all age groups exhibit declines in the number ofbirths per 1000 women with the first two and the lastgroups experiencing the greatest percentages of decline.The total fertility rate or completed family size followeda downward path, going down by nine per cent over the15-yeaf period. Such a decline may have beenexaggerated due to errors in reporting dates of birth inthe five or more years previous to the time ofenumeration. This phenomenon, known as event dis-

Table 3. Fertility Indices for Three Five-Year Periods, 1958-1972

Age ofWnmpnTT UI11CH

(i)

15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-49

Total FertilityRate

Total MaritalFertility

Rate

Age-Specific FertilityRates

(per thousand women)

1958-62(2)

8426031329021110727

6.46

1963-67(3)

7425431328121610120

6.30

1967-72(4)

5622730227219910022

5.89

Age-Specific

(per

1958-62(5)

39642838432523311729

9.56

MaritalFertility Ratesthousand women)

1963-67(6)

43043438831423711021

9.67

1968-72(7)

44944337830721710824

9.63

SOURCE: Concepción, M.B., "Changes in Period Fertility as Gleanedfrom the 1973 NDS," Research Note No. 13, University of thePhilippines Population Institute, 1974.


placement, is frequently present in data peculiarlysubject to recall errors.

A different pattern is noted when the age-specificmarital fertility rates (births per 1000 ever-marriedwomen) are examined (Cols. 5-7). Marital births amongthe younger age groups have increased and the increaseswere not sufficiently offset by decreases among the olderage groups to reduce the total fertility rate to the1958-62 levels. The total fertility rate for marriedwomen was still rising as late as 1963-67 when the totalfertility rate was 9.67. It fell slightly (0.41 per cent)during the next five-year period, 1968-72. Again, thesuggested decline may have been brought about by eventdisplacement.

Two observations can be made from Table 3. Whileenough evidence points to an increasing age at marriageamong Filipino women, they start having their childrenearly in marriage. Secondly, they continued havingchildren up to the end of their childbearing period.

Cohort fertility rates. The fertility indices in Table 3measure the partial fertility performance of womenbelonging to various age cohorts at different periods.The data in this section refer to the fertility experienceof individual cohorts through time. The rates, calledcohort rates, have the advantage of separating short-term fluctuations in established fertility patterns fromlong-range changes.

Table 4 gives the age-specific marital fertility rates forbirth cohorts of women aged 15-59 years of age at thetime of the survey. It also gives the total fertility ratesor completed family size for women who had reachedthe end of their childberaing period by 1973. Thesewomen were born in 1913-17, 1918-22 and 1923-27 .Thefertility rates demonstrate a declining trend whenproceeding from the oldest to the youngest birthcohorts.

de Guzman 15

Table 4. Age-Specific Marital Fertility Rates For All Women of VariousBirth Cohorts (Rates Per 1000 Married Women as of 1973)

Year ofBirth ofWoman

1953-571948-521943-471938-421933-371928-321923-271918-221913-17

Age ofMother atTime ofSurvey

15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-59

15-19

449430396394376316333360336

Age of Mother at

20-24 25-29

443434 22S428 388403 384381 369322 332344 315365 324

30-34

302314325309307258

Birth-Event

35-39

217237233243254

40-44

ios110117144

45-49

242129

TMFR

8.328.548.55

SOURCE: 1973 National Demographic Survey

For all women below age 45 at the time of the 1973National Demographic Survey, no decline in fertilityperformance is evident for the earliest reproductive ages(15-24). Although insubstantial (1.8-3.4 per cent),declines in the birth rates were displayed by the oldercohorts of women between the ages 25-44. It is veryapparent that such declines, if they be true, have juststarted to happen (see rates with underscoring). Thesedeclines in the peak and later childbearing ages haveoccurred at the time when the country embarked on afamily planning program.

The marital fertility rates cumulated up to age 34 ofthose women who have not completed their reproductiveperiod in 1973 are shown in Table 5. The averagenumbers of children born after marriage to women34-44 years old in 1973 were higher than the women 15to 25 years their senior. Women in the older reproduc-tive ages (35-49) manifested declining fertility during theperiod 1968-72.


Table 5. Average Number of Marital live Births Before and After Age 35for Birth Cohorts of Ever-Married Women Aged 35-59:Philippines, 1973

Age at Time of ChildbirthAge at Time of Survey

15-34 35-49

35-3940-4445-4950-5455-59

7.386.966.486.636.42

——1.841.902.14


It is evident from Tables 4 and 5 that throughouttheir reproductive life time, the younger cohortsreported higher birth rates than the older cohorts (aged45 and over at the time of the survey). Two explanationshave been advanced by Flieger (1975) to explain thisphenomenon. The older birth cohorts started theirchildbearing during the Second World War, whichundoubtedly had a depressing effect on overall fertilityperformance. The younger birth cohorts (aged 15-44)became the beneficiaries of improved health and livingconditions brought about by the national developmentprocess. Such conditions led to a decrease in mortalityin general, and maternal and infant deaths in particular.

Marriage patterns. Shifts in the proportions single anda rise in the age at marriage among women havemeasurable impact on the overall level of fertility,unless counterbalanced by changes in fertility behaviorwithin marriage.

The per cents single among females by age groups andthe singulate mean ages at marriage (SMAM) from thenational censuses and the 1973 National DemographicSurvey are provided in Table 10 of Chapter 3. Per centssingle have increased steadily for all, except the oldest

de Guzman 17

age groups from 1903-73. The per cent single at agegroup 15-19 increased from 73.6 per cent to 91.5 percent, a gain of 17.9 points over the period, while the percent single at ages 20-24 rose by 22.6 points. In 1903,about one in four women aged 15-19 was married whilein 1973 only one in twelve women in the same age groupwas married. Among women aged 20-24, two in threewere married in 1903, in contrast to just over four in tenin 1973.

Significant,delays in female age at marriage is evidentover the 1903-60 period. An acceleration of the trendduring the 1960s is revealed by the 1970 census.Moreover, data from the 1973 National DemographicSurvey indicate a further acceleration of the trendduring the 1960s shown by the 1970 census. Further-more, data from the 1973 National Demographic Surveyindicate a further acceleration over 1970-73. The meanage at marriage for females in 1973 was 23.7, anincrease of 2.8 years between 1903 and 1973. Thecomparative figure for males for the same year was 25.7years. For both males and females, higher mean ages atmarriage have been observed in the urban sector than inthe rural areas. Residential differences were a little overnine per cent for males and about 12 per cent forfemales.

Smith (1975) analyzed provincial, urban-rural, andregional differences utilizing a special index of marriagepattern (1^) calculated from census data. Over the1903-39 period the female ages at marriage declined in20 out of 45 provinces (see Table 6). In postwar years to1960, all provinces except three experienced delayedmarriage. During the 1960s, all provinces underwentsubstantial delay, especially those which had laggedbehind before 1960.

In 1903, Isabela had the highest Im (.893), whileBohol had the lowest (.625). In 18 provinces, Im,exceeded .800 while only three had indices below 0.700.

18

Table 6. Indica of Maniate Patten1970: 45 Province«

COMPONENTS OF GROWTH

for Fenulei, 1903,1939,19« and

Province

1. Abra2. Albay3. Antique4. Bataan5. Batangas6. Bohol7. Bulacan8. Cagayan9. Capiz

10. Camarines11. Cavité12. Cebú13. Cotabato14. Davao15. Hocos Norte16. Hocos Sur17. Iloilo18. Isabela19. Laguna20. La Union21. Leyte22. Manila23. Marínduque24. Masbate25. Mindoro26. Misamis Occ.27. Misamis Or.28. Mt. Province29. Negros Occ.30. Negros Or.31. Nueva Ecija32. Nueva Vizcaya33. Palawan34. Pampanga35. Pangasinan36. Quezon37. Rizal38. Romblon39. Samar40. Sorsogon41. Sulu42. Surigao43. Tarlac44. Zambales45. Zamboanga

PHILIPPINES

1903

.755

.735

.745

.809

.760

.625

.755

.868

.721

.788

.809

.670

.847

.832

.773

.726

.776

.893

.811

.755

.713

.797

.688

.782

.845

.743

.792

.813

.860

.699

.840

.907

.758

.761

.873

.815

.812

.804

.796

.783

.827

.765

.873

.844

.768

.770

1939

.731

.751

.713

.765

.697

.678

.675

.756

.724

.791

.758

.683

.867

.869

.603

.593

.691

.801

.773

.609 .

.768

.670

.766

.862

.834

.790

.785

.858

.798

.753

.761

.820

.837

.704

.722

.827

.727

.772

.806;807.853.805.748.785.830.705

19*0

.719

.683

.635

.760

.669

.651

.614

.750

.698

.717

.651

.632

.758

.771

.633

.629

.606

.802

.702

.667

.737

.492

.747

.787

.800

.669

.705

.763

.683

.694

.695

.782

.817

.659

.676

.772

.574

.728

.772

.734

.746

.724

.700

.688

.761

.647

1970

Total

.599

.621

.574

.616

.575

.572

.576

.665

.608

.634

.575

.572

.680

.662

.581

.587

.538

.728

.599

.572

.661

.470

.663

.716

.6%

.578

.606

.662

.599

.625

.631

.678

.724

.595

.592

.681

.533

.660

.712

.649

.648

.669

.616

.603

.681

.614

Urban

.497

.490

.465

.540

.487

.466

.562

.544

.473

.518

.539

.516

.553

.555

.489

.498

.451

.648

.567

.475

.538

.470

.499

.559

.591

.444

.507

.517

.510

.486

.556

.569

.622

.572

.509

.573

.528

.525

.585

.525

.603

.580

.525

.570

.555

.528

Rnral

.623

.656

.594

.639

.591

.590

.589

.687

.631

.688

.615

.615

.704

.706

.614

.607

.578

.741

.633

.587

.696—

.690

.749

.724

.607

.637

.700

.649

.650

.654

.714

.750

.606

.614

.730

.635

.682

.711

.693

.658

.707

.636

.641

.707

.662

SOURCE: Peter C. Smith, "Provincial and Urban-Rural Differences . . .'Research Note No. 49, UPPI, 1975.

de Guzman 19

During the years prior to 1939, the Im values plungeddownward in 20 provinces, the rates of decline rangingfrom 22 per cent (llocos Norte) to 11 per cent(Marinduque). By 1939, provincial Im s ranged from0.869 in Davao to 0.603 in llocos Norte. Between 1939and 1970, only four provinces had Im values above0.700; and seventeen below 0.600.

Over a period of seventy years, the national Im hadfallen by 20 per cent. Downward shifts of 30 per cent ormore were noted for five provinces.

The urban areas everywhere took the lead in all thesechanges. The overall urban Im in 1970 was 31 per centbelow the 1903 national level. Manila which demons-trated early marriage in 1903 had by 1970 the lowestindex, 29 per cent below the 1970 rural value and 39 percent below the national value in 1903.

Smith (1975) summarized the regional nuptialitypatterns and differences as follows: 1) internal migrationhas a complex impact upon marriage patterns in areasof destination and origin, depending upon the maritalstatus of migrants at the time of migration and thetiming of marriage after migration, the sex selectivity ofmigration, and age, sex and marital differentialsbetween early and late-migration streams; 2) areas ofheavy in-migration showed increases in Im (shifts toearlier marriage) before 1939 and delayed marriagethereafter; and 3) the Philippines' core region (ManilaRegion consisting of five provinces and the remainder ofCentral Luzon) has exhibited a major shift toward latermarriage.

Differentials in fertility. The study of differentials infertility has become increasingly important in recentyears. This is because differentials provide valuableinformation on the relative contribution of differentgroups in any given population to the overall level offertility, and hence, indicate probable changes.

20 COMPONENTS OF GRO WTH

Fertility is determined by an elaborate set of diversefactors. In general, important biological, geographic,socio-economic, and psycho-religious elements contri-bute to the determination of fertility. However, thesefertility determinants do not act in isolation. Each of thefactors is connected with a whole spectrum of variousother factors.

Table 7. Fertility Ratios of Women 45-54 by Selected Characteristics,1968 and 1973

Characteristics

A. EducationCollege 1-4 and overHigh School 1-4Grades 5-7Grades 1-4No Schooling

B. OccupationWhite CollarProprietors and SaleswomenBlue CollarFarmers

C. Labor Force ParticipationIn the Labor ForceNot in the Labor Force

D. Family IncomeP1000 and overUnder PI 000

E. Age at MarriageUnder 15 years old15-1920-2425-29

1968

4.785.766.406.465.59

5.296.326.646.69

6.106.08

6.086.60

7.907.096,054.68

1973

4.656.226.276.695.75

4.446.446.006.34

5.886.14

5.306.79

7.847.256.244.60

SOURCE: Elíseo A. de Guzman. Trends in Differential Fertility . . .," 1975

Education and fertility. In general, available datapoint to an inverse relationship between fertility andeducation. The higher the educational attainment, thesmaller is the mean number of children per woman. Forexample, in 1958, women who reported having receivedsome college education had about a third less the

de Guzman 21

number of children (4.30), on the average, than personswith no schooling (7.15), or those with primary schooleducation alone (7.56). The same observation ofdecreasing fertility with increasing education holds truefor women of childbearing ages and of completedfertility in 1968 and in 1973.

Wife's occupation. Occupation is one of the mostfrequently used indices of socio-economic status in theanalysis of fertility differentials. Relatively high fertilityhas been associated with farming and other low rankingoccupations while lower fertility has been associatedwith the professional and white collar occupations.

Data from the Philippine Statistical Survey ofHouseholds (PSSH) of 1958 and the National Demo-graphic Surveys of 1968 and 1973 clearly show theinverse relationship between fertility and occupationalcategories; however, there is an important exception tothe pattern in the 1973 data. Fertility ratios calculatedfrom the 1958 and 1968 data monotonically decreasedfrom one occupational level to the next higher levelwhen ranked in terms of status. In the case of the 1973data, proprietors and sales women in the post-child-bearing ages had a higher average number of childrenever born than blue-collar workers and farmers, exceptamong other urban women aged 55-64.

Work status. Research undertaken in various settingsseem to point to the dependence of the female laborforce participation/female reproductive behavior rela-tionship on the nature of the economic activity and thesetting in which this activity takes place. In addition, thepresence or absence of conflict between mother andworker roles seems to influence the emergence of afertility-employment relationship.

Available data show that the cumulative fertility ratiosof women who constitute part of the working population


were, in all cases, lower than the ratios for women noteconomically active. In 1958, working women living inManila in the post-childbearing ages tended to haveabout one child less, on the average, than those notworking. In other urban areas, the difference was 0.51",whereas in the rural areas, the difference was only 0.08in favor of those in the labor force. This signifies thateconomic activity only assumes importance as a contri-buting factor to fertility differences in the truly urbanplaces.

Among women aged 35-44 at the time of the 1968National Demographic Survey, there was a gradient oflow to high fertility proceeding along the followinglines: urban-working, urban-nonworking, rural-working,rural-nonworking. Consistent with the 1958 results, thispattern seems to suggest that it is only labor forceparticipation in urban-industrial pursuits which results inlow fertility levels. Work-related activities in the ruralareas, on the other hand, are such as to promote verylittle, if any, conflict between the work role and themother role. Consequently, working women in the ruralareas exhibit fertility levels higher than those ofnonworking women in the urban areas.

Income status. In general, fertility is negativelyassociated with income level. Existing data show th^tthis inverse association between the two variables ismore marked among women in the childbearing agesthan those in the post-childbearing period.

In 1956, women in households reporting annualincome of less than 2,000 pesos had higher fertility thanwomen living in households with annual incomes of2,000 pesos or more. In Metropolitan Manila, the higherincome group consistently demonstrated lower fertilitywith the exception of women aged 35-39.

The negative relationship between family size andincome, however, is found only to a certain point.

de Guzman 11

There are instances within the higher income groups inwhich family size is positively associated with income.Women in families having annual incomes of 3,000pesos or more reported higher average numbers ofchildren than women in families receiving incomes ofless than 500 pesos yearly. The lowest income groupswere also observed to exhibit very low levels of familysize. It can be argued that very low economic statusadversely affects the physiological capacity of women inthese groups to bear children.

Age at marriage. The effect of the woman's age atmarriage on her marital fertility is well-established. Bymarrying early in the reproductive period, all otherthings being equal, a woman will produce more childrenthan one who marries later and who spends only aportion of that period in marriage.

Philippine data point to a systematic decrease in themean number of children per woman with increasing ageat marriage. In all cases, women who married below theage of 15 produced the greatest number of children. Forexample, the data for 1956 revealed that women aged45-49 and who married at age 30-34, had 71 per centless children than those who married before reachingtheir 15th birthday. In 1968 and 1973, the differenceswere 51 per cent and 58 per cent, respectively.

Concepción, Flieger, Pascual, and Stinner (1975)observed that among women married less than fiveyears, postponement of marriage to over 20 years of agereduced fertility by at least one child. Among thosemarried for 5-9 years, postponement of marriage beyondthe middle twenties resulted in a reduction of just abouthalf a child. Postponement of marriage to the earlytwenties resulted in a similar fertility reduction amongthose married for 10-19 years.


Urban-rural differentials. One of the more widespreadcontentions in differential fertility studies has been thaturban populations show lower fertility than ruralpopulations. Various reasons advanced include thedeclining utility of children as productive assets, andtheir increasing financial liability; the increased levels ofeducational attainment among the urban female popula-tion and the variegated opportunity structure in theurban area, which provides alternative roles other thanthat of mother and childbearer; increased opportunityfor social mobility as well as increased aspirations forsuch mobility.

The difference in fertility between city and non-citydwellers in the Philippines is substantial and in favor ofthe latter. In 1956, for women between the ages of 25and 30, the city versus village difference was 0.70children; for the next older group of women, it was 1.03children. Corresponding differences in cumulative fertilityratios for 1973 were 1.15 and 1.09, respectively.Rural-urban differences in mean number of childrenborn to women persisted even when the effects ofeducation, income, work status, age at marriage,occupation and current age were held constant.

Mortality

Increased food production, higher educational levelreached by members of the population, better medicaland health facilities, widespread hygiene and sanitationpractices and other improvements in socio-economicconditions have contributed largely to the decline of thePhilippine death rate. With a high level of births, thesedramatic reductions in mortality have boosted thegrowth of the Philippine population.

de Guzman 25

Mortality trends and levels. The crude death rate forthe Philippines declined by about 85 per cent between1903 and 1960 as presented in Table 8. Aromin's (1961)estimates show that the death rate dropped from a highlevel of 58 per 1000 population in 1903 to 14.5 duringthe five-year period, 1956-60. The 1971 crude deathrate for the Philippines, based on data from theNational Census and Statistics Office (NCSO) sampleregistration areas, was 11.6 for both sexes combined(Flieger, 1975). Lorimer (1966) assumed that the deathrate would be in the neighborhood of 11.8 for theperiod 1965-70. A life table for the Philippines for1970, prepared by Engracia (1974), implies a death rateof 11.73 for both sexes combined.

Analyses have demonstrated that death registration onthe sectoral level is a function of development. A higherdegree of under-registration has been displayed by themore rural and less affluent provinces. To illustrate,registered data for the City of Manila, which enjoys arelatively high level of living, pointed to the highestmortality level (15.5 deaths per 1000 population). Incomparison, a crude death rate of 0.53 deaths per 1000was recorded for the province of Lanao de Sur, which isone of the most underdeveloped areas.

The crude death rates for the major geographicregions in 1973 estimated by Zablan (1975) are listed inTable 9. Five out of 12 regions were estimated to havecrude death rates lower than the Philippine figure of 9.2deaths per 1000 population. These are Southern Min-danao (8.0), Southern Luzon (8.1), Central Luzon (7.6),Metropolitan Manila (7.2), and Bicol (6.8). Four regionsappear to be disadvantaged in that their crude deathrates were higher than the national average. They areWestern Visayas (9.9), Cagayan Valley-Batanes (10.2),Northern Mindanao (10.8), and Eastern Visayas (11.2).

Despite the decline of the crude death rate, infantmortality remains high. In 1971, infant mortality for the


Philippines as a whole was estimated at 80 deaths per1,000 live births. By 1973, the level of infant deaths wasabout 68 per 1,000 live births, a decline of 15 per centfrom the previous level. It must be noted that thesefigures represent the averages which mask the actualsituation existing in the different regions. Infantmortality in some of the regions was very high in 1971,ranging from 116 in Southern Luzon to 182 in the CagayanValley (Flieger, 1975). The opposite is graduallybecoming true; infant mortality rates in 1973 werebetween 50.3 in Central Luzon to 90.3 in NorthernMindanao (Zablan, 1975). Substantial declines in infantmortality have been observed in the llocos and Mt.Province, Cagayan Valley-Batanes, Eastern Visayas, andWestern Visayas.Table 8. Estimated Crude Death Rates for the Philippines, 1903-1971

Estimate

Aromin '

Lorimer 2Flieger 3

Period

19031904-19051911-19151931-19351946-19501951-19551956-19601965-19701971

Crude Death Rate

(per thousand)

58.026.825.323.521.817.914.512.011.6

SOURCES:1 Basilio B. Aromin, "The Trend of Mortality in the Philippines: 1903 to

1960," The Statistical Reporter (Manila), Vol. V, No. 3, July 1961, p. 5.Estimates are by "Method I I " which assumes a constant birth rate and aconstant degree of completeness of the registration of deaths. Annualrates were estimated by this method for 1903-35 and 1946-60.

Lorimer, "Analysis and Projections of the Philippine Population,"in First Conference on Population, 1965, Quezon City: U.P. Press

^Wilhelm Flieger, "Some Comments on Current Mortality. Information inthe Philippines," Philippine Population Research, Rodolfo A. Bulatao, ed.,Makati, Rizal, Population Center Foundation.

de Guzman 27

Together with decreases in the number of deaths is theincrease in years of life expectancy at birth. A set of lifetables constructed by Hizon and de Castro in 1965showed a life expectancy at birth of 53.3 years for 1960for Filipinos. The corresponding rate estimated by theBureau of Census and Statistics was 56.3 years. The lifeexpectancy at birth rose steadily from a low 37.5 yearsin 1918 to 40 years in 1938; by 1948, life expectancyhovered between 42.5 and 53.3 years (Aromin, 1961;Madigan-Avanceña, 1965; Hizon-de Castro, 1965).

The expectation of life at birth for males in 1970 was55 years; that for females was 61 years (Engracia, 1974).The life expectancy is expected to lengthen furtheralthough it is unlikely to exceed 70 years by the year2000.

Zablan (1976) observed that, in general, the decline inmortality as demonstrated by increasing life expectancyat birth was characterized by three phases: 1) a periodof moderate increases (1918-39), during which the

Table 9. Crude Death Rates by Major Regions: 1973

Region

PHILIPPINESI. llocos and Mt. Province

II. Cagayan Valley-BatanesIII. Central LuzonIV. Southern LuzonV. Bicol

VI. Western VisayasVII. Central Visayas

VIII. Eastern VisayasIX. Western MindanaoX. Northern Mindanao

XI. Southern MindanaoXII.. Metropolitan Manila

Crude death rate(per 1000)

9.179.39

10.247.648.076.769.949.27

11.199.36

10.818.017.22

SOURCE:1Zelda C. Zablan, "Regional Differentials in Mortality: Philippines, 1973,"

Research Note No. 64, UPPI, 1975.


yearly increment averaged 0.42 years; 2) a period ofrapid increase (1948-68), when the annual increasesaveraged 0.76 years; and, finally, 3) a period of slowgrowth (1968-73), with increases of 0.36 per year.

Reduction in the death rate—particularly in theyounger age groups—tend to augment populationgrowth in two ways: 1) by slowing the attrition of theexisting population; and 2) by increasing the number ofwomen who survive through their childbearing years.For instance, in 1903, only about 19,000 females out of100,000 could be expected to survive to the age of 45.However, in 1960, about 69,000 females could beexpected to reach the same age. Coupled with high birthrates, this new pattern of survival offers a powerfulimpetus to continued rapid population growth.

Causes of deaths. A review of mortality trends bycauses of death is essential in order to find out if theobserved improvements in general mortality have beenaccompanied by a shift in the relative importance ofsome causes of death. The trend in leading causes ofdeath is revealed in Table 10. When all causes weregrouped into three broad categories,,deaths attributed tocommunicable diseases declined; those from malignantneoplasms and diseases of the heart and the vascularsystem increased. While there was a noticeable shiftfrom communicable to degenerative diseases, deaths dueto communicable diseases continued to dominate, andconstituted about 40 per cent of total deaths in 1972.

Pneumonia and tuberculosis, the two major killers,accounted for 27.1 per cent of total deaths in the sameyear. The declines in deaths from communicable diseaseswere greatest in the latter half of the 1950s until the late1960s and coincided with the peak increases in the lifeexpectation at birth. The early 1970s showed moremodest declines in deaths by these causes. Deaths due todegenerative disorders had been observed to increase

de Guzman 29

steadily, but the levels were considerably lower thanthose of the communicable diseases.

The problem diseases are of the kind not easilycontrolled by direct spraying and inoculation. Theirroots lie deep in poverty, abetted by inadequateknowledge of preventive medicine and environmentalhygiene. Not only is the present health care systeminadequate to meet these problems, but there has alsobeen maldistribution in health facilities; Department ofHealth statistics point to a declining rather than to anincreasing doctor-population ratio. Hospitals are heavilyconcentrated in the Metropolitan Manila area. Officialexpenditure on health is decreasing, shown by itsproportionate share of the total government budget.

Table 10. Death Rates by Leading

Cause of Death

Causes: 1946-1972

Death Rate per 100,000 Population

1946 1950 1955 1960 I 1965 1970 1972

PneumoniaRespiratory Tuberculosis

Gastroenteritis

Heart Disease

Ill-defined diseaseof early infancy

Accidents

Disease of Vascular System

Nutritional Deficiency

Malignant Neoplasms

Bronchitis

Tetanus

Influenza

Measles

Dysentery

Malaria

197.4

167.2

58.7

—

—

—

—

145.7*

—

129.7

6.6

51:3

91.0

34.7

11.8

136.7

135.5

57.7

18.7

—

—

—

113.6»

8.6

100.6

5.9

26.1

38.3

7.0

4.1

106.6

97.6

56.7

34.7

—

17.4

—

92.8*

11.7

73.9

7.4

14.1

15.6

3.9

2.8

100.4

92.1

60.5

27.6

32.5

14.6

20.6

54.4*

18.2

57.2

9.4

7.1

3.7

1.4

5.0

121.283.4

46.0

33.6

—

23.2

27.9

49.9

22.2

43.1

10.4

7.3

8.7

3.7

5.0

118.2

77.0

35.0

34.0

19.1

24.8

35.8

25.5

25.6

27.9

10.1

7.2

4.5

2.4

1.8

125.1

73.3

44.0

43.5

39.9

37.0

32.9

31.4

26.3

23.7

9.3

8.4

5.3

2.2

1.7

* from Beri-beri only.

SOURCE: Disease Intelligence Center, Philippine Health Statistics Re-ports, 1960-72, Department of Health, Manila.


A related problem to health concerns the high rate ofmalnutrition. Department of Health estimates showedthat 80 per cent of children under six were malnourished.The incidence of such cases will probably rise in thenear future unless drastic steps are taken to improvenutrient intake at all ages.

Mortality differentials. As in the case of fertility,analysis of mortality by subgroups of the populationpermits the identification of mechanisms which underliedifferential mortality. Isolation of high and low mortalitysubgroups can be useful in ascertaining specific targetpopulations for mortality improvement endeavors.Furthermore, knowledge of the mechanisms in operationcan provide a framework and a rationale in which tobase policies directed at the disadvantaged sub-popula-tions.

Urban-rural differentials. Higher mortality rates havebeen noted for the rural than the urban sector. In 1968,the average crude death rate for the rural areas wasestimated at 9.3 deaths per thousand as against 8.4deaths among urbanités, a difference of 11 per cent.

Recent mortality estimates show that in 1968 the levelof deaths among rural infants was approximately 30 percent higher than among their urban counterparts. Aslight narrowing of the differential (24 per cent) wasobserved in 1973. In terms of life expectancy at birth,the urbanité was expected to live longer than hiscounterpart from the rural area by about an average 2.5years in 1968 and 2.4 years in 1973.

Occupation. Various studies (Lotka and Spiegelman,1949; Moriyama and Guralnick, 1955; Häuser andKitagawa, 1973) indicate an inverse relationship betweenoccupational level and mortality. Lower mortality hasbeen associated with higher-ranking occupational classes.In 1973, those who held professional, administrativeand managerial posts had the highest life expectancy at

de Guzman 31

birth (67.3 years). This was 15 per cent higher than thatfor the white collar workers (58.4 years) and 20 per centhigher than farm workers (55.0). The disparity inmortality experience is more marked when infantmortality rates are compared by occupation of mother.The level of infant mortality among farm workers was195 per cent higher than that of professionals and abouttwice as high as those who have no occupation at all.

Marital status differences. Mortality differences bymarital status in the Philippines are consistent withinternational findings. Married persons have lower deathrates than those who are single. Data for 1960 revealedthat married females aged 15-19 expected to live abouteight years longer than single females and about a yearlonger than divorced ones. In 1970, a slight decrease inthe mortality differential between married and singlewomen was noted. Married males in the same age grouphad an average life expectation at birth 14 years greaterthan that for single males. These differences, however,continued till the older ages with a slight contraction.

Education. Life expectancy increases linearly witheducational attainment. College education means anincrease in life expectancy by about 13 years, from a lifeexpectancy of approximately 57 years with no schoolingto about 70 years with at least a year in college. Oneyear of schooling increases life expectation by about twoyears (59.3 years for grades 1-4 vs. 57.3 years for noschooling). Also, those who spent more years in schoolhad relatively lower crude death rates and infantmortality rates. This situation is expected since increa-sing education is associated with increased awareness ofbetter health and sanitation, nutrition, preventive care,and the recognition of important morbidity symptoms.In addition, higher educational attainment usuallyimplies higher income and occupational status, whichare both conducive to low mortality.


REFERENCES

Alcantara, Adelamar. "Differential Mortality AmongPopulation Subgroups." Research Note No. 63, U.P.Population Institute, 1975.

Aromin, Basilio. "The Trend of Mortality in the Phi-lippines, 1903. tö 1960," The Statistical Reporter. Vol.5, No. 3, pp. 1-7.

Concepción, Mercedes B., Wilhelm Flieger, Elvira M.Pascual, and William F. Stinner. "The ChildbearingPatterns of Young Filipino Women." In A Demo-graphic Path to Modernity,Wilhelm Flieger and PeterC. Smith (eds.). Quezon City: U.P. Press, 1975, pp.27-152.

Engracia, Luisa T. "Estimates of the Life Table Func-tions of the Philippines." Paper delivered at theAnnual Conference of the Philippine StatisticalAssociation. Manila, 1974.

Flieger, Wilhelm. "Some Comments on Current Mor-tality Information in the Philippines." In PhilippinePopulation Research, Rodolfo A. Bulatao, ed. Makati,Rizal, Population Center Foundation.

Häuser, Philip M. and Evelyn M. Kitagawa DifferentialMortality in the United States: A Study in Socio-economic Epidemiology. Cambridge: Harvard Univer-sity, 1973.

Hizon, Manuel O. and de Castro, I. "Revised Study onPopulation Mortality from Philippine Census of1960," The Philippine Statistician, Vol. 15, Nos. 3-4,pp. 16-30.

Lorimer, Frank W. "Analysis and Projections of thePopulation of the Philippines." In First Conferenceon Population 1965. Quezon City: U.P. Press, 1966,pp. 200-314.

de Guzman 33

Madigan, Frank C. "Some Recent Vital Rates andTrends in the Philippines: Estimates and Evaluation."Demography. Vol. 2, pp. 309-316.

Moriyama and Guralnick. "Occupational and ClassDifferential in Mortality." Trends and Differentials inMortality. New York, Milbank Memorial Fund, 1956.

Smith, Peter C. "Provincial and Urban-Rural Differen-ces in Marriage Pattern: The Evidence for the 1960s,"Research Note No. 49, U.P. Population Institute,1975.

"The Turn-of-the-Century BirthRate: Estimates from Birth Registration and AgeStructure." In A Demographic Path to Modernity,Wilhelm Flieger and Peter C. Smith (eds.). QuezonCity: U.P. Press, 1975. pp. 82-90.

Zablan, Zelda C. "Regional Differentials in Mortality:Philippines, 1973," Research Note No. 64, U.P.Population Institute, 1975.

"The Evaluation of Existing Morta-lity Estimates: Philippines, 1902-1973," ResearchNote No. 82, U.P. Population Institute, 1976.

POPULATIONCOMPOSITION

ELÍSEO A. DE GUZMAN

MOST BASIC of all demographic attributes is the sexcomposition of a population, with its direct influenceon fertility, mortality and nuptiality. The ratiobetween the sexes affects rates of migration, labor forceand occupational structure, and almost all otherpopulation characteristics. The sex structure is con-veniently described by the sex ratio defined as thenumber of males per 1000 females.

Sex Structure.The male and female populations of the Philippines

for various censuses, as well as the corresponding sexratios, are shown in Table 1. Both the male and femalepopulations have been steadily increasing and sinceÍ903, the greatest gains were recorded between 1918and 1939, the male population gaining by 36 per centand the female population by 35 per cent. A decelera-tion in intercensal gains, percentage-wise, seems appa-rent starting with the 1960s. Except for 1903 and1970, the males have always outnumbered the females.In 1903, the females were 582 more than the males; thedifference in 1970 was 183,784. Changes in the sex ratiowere greatest by 1970. In 1960 the sex ratio was 1018,this went down to 990 in 1970. A general trend of thesex ratio above 1000 makes the 1970 figure suspect.Analysis of the 1970 results is being made to determinethe cause of such sex imbalance.

35

36 POPULA TION COMPOSITION

Table 1. Enumerated Male and Female Populations of the Philippines and SexRatios for Census Years

Census

190319181939194819601970

Male

3,817,4225,177,5678,065,2819,651,195

13,662,86918,250,351

CentChange

26.335.8'16.429.425.1

Female

3,818,0045,163,7437,935,0229,582,987

13,424,81618,434,135

Per CentChange

26.134.917.228.627.2

SexRatio

10001003101610071018990

Per CentChangein the

Sex Ratio

0.301.30-.891.10

-2.83

SOURCES: Bureau of the Census and Statistics Office, Census Report of1960; National Census and Statistics, Census Report for 1970.

Differences in the sex ratio by age group can be seenfrom Table 2. In all census years, the sex ratios at theearly ages exceed 1000, indicating a preponderance ofmales over females in these ages. This is primarily dueto a sex ratio at birth that is biased in favor of males.This advantage, however, is diminished gradually withadvancing age, so that in the intermediate ages, thefemales are greater in number than the males. It can benoted from the table that there was generally an excessof males at ages 40 and over.

Table 2. Sex Ratio of the Population by Age Group, 1903-1970

Age Groups

0-45-14

15-2930-3940-5960 +

1903

10181054874.

110110531007

1918

10111015950990

10671080

1939

10441052964

196810261023

1948

10601057934980

10181025

1960

106110621382967

1029908

1970

10281035941963972985

SOURCES: Bureau of the Census and Statistics Office, Census ReportsReports for 1903, 1918, 1939, 1948, 1960; National Census andStatistics Office, 1970, 1975.

de Guzman 37

Regional variations in the sex ratio by age group aredisplayed in Table 3. The variations may be attributedto various factors such as the sex ratio at birth,mortality differentials, and sex-selectivity in migration.For example, the preponderance of males in in-migrationstreams to Cagayan Valley, Bicol Region, and the twoMindanao regions have resulted in sex ratios well above1000. It is believed that the disappearance of frontierareas and the easing up of migratory movements havecaused a gradual decline in the sex ratios. The slightexcess of males in the Eastern Visayas region may bepartly due to the larger number of females out-migratingfrom the area.

Table 3. Sex Ratio by Regions and by Broad Age Groups, 1970

Regions

llocos RegionCagayan ValleyCentral LuzonSouthern LuzonBicol RegionWestern VisayasCentral VisayasEastern VisayasWestern MindanaoNorthern MindanaoSouthern MindanaoMetropolitan Manila

0-4

103310861032106110371014103410341006102010291054

5-14

108710661059105410601023105510551045105110661013

15-29

940994922876955910905985889928945825

30-39

96310671007105810171002976

1019105211091177979

40-49

861935880956948848887930

101010531102947

50-69

774956838876978875848971

108310661170903

70 +

790982935946

1124963938

1044119211501126865

TOTAL

9591029980994

1016967961

1014996

10201049933

SOURCE: NCSO, Census Report for 1970.

On the other hand, the low sex ratios in the otherregions have been due to predominantly male out-migration, except Metropolitan Manila and SouthernLuzon, where an increasing number of young femalein-migrants have been recorded (note the very low sexratios in the age group 15-29).

That the urban areas are predominantly female isdepicted in Table 4. In 11 out of 12 regions, the females

38 POPULATION COMPOSITION

exceeded the males by as much as 11 per cent. Againmigration provides the most important reason for thefemininity of the urban areas where the growth of serviceindustries and the proliferation of jobs for women haveincreasingly attracted rural females. In general, the ruralareas are male-dominated.

Table 4. Sex Ratios by Regional Divisions and by Residence, 1970

Regions

I. llocos RegionII. Cagayan Valley-Batanes

III. Central LuzonIV. Southern LuzonV. Bicol Region



XI. Southern MindanaoXII. Metropolitan Manila

Urban

892989941956960912931955933976

1002932

Residence

Rural

9751036996

10251030988973

1029100810321063—

Total

9591029980994

1016967961

1014996

10201049932


Age Structure

The age composition of the Philippine populationreflects the effects of past levels and trends of births anddeaths. Though there is paucity of data on internationalmigration, reliable sources have shown that immigrationor emigration has not reached a magnitude large enoughto alter the age structure of the population.

The distribution of the population by broad agegroups is shown in Table 5. A high level of fertility anda declining mortality level resulted in an increasingproportion of 0-14 year-olds, reported to be a little over39 per cent in 1903. By 1970, the proportion rose toabout 46 per cent. The reverse is true in the broad agegroups, 15-64 and 65 years and over. The proportion of

de Guzman 39

the population in the economically productive ages,15-64 years, which was 57.2 per cent at the beginning ofthe century declined to about 52 per cent by 1970.Likewise, the relative share of the population in theoldest age group, 65 and over, decreased from 3.3 percent to 2.9 per cent over the same period. All of thesepoint to the fact that the Philippine population is notonly young, but also getting younger. In 1903, themedian age of the population was 20.2 years. By 1970,the median age had dropped to 17.9.

Table 5. Percentage Distribution by

ABeGroups

All0-45-14

15-2425-4950-6465 +

0-1415-6465 +

Median Age

1903

100.015.124.418.030.98.33.3

39.557.23.3

20.2

1918

100.016.927.319.227.17.12.4

44.253.42.4

18.5

Age Group, Philippines 1903-1970

Census Years

1939

100.016.326.819.826.96.83.4

43.153.53.4

18.3

1948

100.015.628.619.927.05.83.1

44.252.73.1

17.7

1960

100.016.928.819.526.16.02.7

45.751.62.7

17.1

1970

100.016.928.819.725.16.72.8

45.551.72.8

17.9

SOURCE: Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Census Reports for 1903-1970.

The 1970 distribution of the population by sex andurban-rural residence is presented in Table 6. When themale and female distributions are compared, three maindifferences emerge:

• a relatively greater share of the male population inthe younger ages 0-14;

• a greater proportion of the female population in theworking ages 15-64; and

• a slightly higher share of the female population inadvanced age group 65 and over.


Regardless of sex, the rural population has a higherpercentage of young children in the ages 0-14 and oldpersons aged 65 and over than is found in the urbanpopulation. Conversely, the urban sector has more of itspopulation concentrated in the ages 15-64. This situationgives rise to a higher dependency, of the young andthe old, in the rural areas.

Table 6. Population of the Philippines byCensuses

AgeGroups

All Ages0-45-9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465 +

Age and Sex as Reportedand Per Cent Change (Population in Thousands)

Total1960

270884572436934352814245919531556142810991033710488431739

1970

3668462125529503040833153246220731900148612831016808614

1034

PercentChange

35.435.926.546.445.128.226.033.233.635.224.343.165.642.539.9

MaleI960

1366323542254176613851194952765702546525362252232369

1970

182503149282625491984152711901008941732626502403311506

PercentChange

33.633.825.144.343.327.924.931.934.034.019.437.559.734.437.2

in I960

Female1960

1342522182115166914291264100179172655250834Í236199370

1970

184343063270824812099162612721065959754657514405303528

and 1970

Per CentChange

37.338.128.148.646.828.627.134.532.136.429.349.172.052.042.7

SOURCES: Bureau of the Census and Statistics Office, Census Report of1960; National Census and Statistics, Census Report for 1970.

The sex-age'distributions of the population in thecensuses of 1960 and 1970 are provided in Table 6.Overall, the number of persons in each group increasedsubstantially, the smallest increase being 26 per centreported for the age group 25-29 years. Increases ofmore than 40 per cent were registered in the age groups10-14, 15-19, 50-54, 55-59 and 60-64. Similar increaseswere also noted in the same age groups among females.The amount of increase for these same age groups is lesssharp among males. Regardless of sex, the age group55-59 years exhibited a dramatic increase. In general, the

de Guzman 41

observed increments may be due to reductions of infantand child mortality in the case of the younger ages andto better reporting of population in the advanced ages inthe later census. Further analysis of the enumeratedfigures is limited by possible errors in the censuses.

For example, in the 1960 census, irregularities in thereported numbers of the population, caused by "heaping"and "scooping" have been found in the middle rangeages and thereafter in all age groups beginning withzero, although the distortions at late ages are rathershort range.1 The irregularities were largely due toerrors in age reporting and possibly caused in part bydifferential under-enumeration in the case of males.Errors in the 1970 census may have arisen throughselective under-enumeration, misreporting of ages, andcoding errors? Irregularities were noted especially inthe age groups 15-24 where there was a deficit of about450,000 males as compared to females, resulting froman apparent under-statement of ages particularly amongwomen in the middle ages.

Table 7. Percentage Distribution of the Philippine Populationby Sex and Residence, 1970

Age Groups

AH Ages0-45-14

15-2425-4950-6465 +

0^115-6465 +

Tolal

100.017.229.519.324.66.62.8

46.750.52.8

Male

Urban

100.016.227.821.025.76.62.7

44.053.32.7

Rural

loo.o17.730.218.524.16.72.8

47.949.32.8

Total

100.016.628.120.225.6

6.62.9

44.752.42.9

Female

Urban

100.014.825.723.826.36.62.8

40.556.72.8

Rural

100.017.529.418.525.16.62.9

46.950.22.9

SOURCE: National Census and Statistics Office, Census Report for 19701See analysis of sex and age distribution by Frank W. Lorimer in his"Analysis and Projections of the Population of the Philippines, "FirstConference on Population, 1965, Quezon City: Population Institute, 1966,pp. 243-249.o^Evidences of such errors were discovered by Yun Kim and others in theiranalysis of the 1970 census for projection purposes. See "PopulationProjections for the Philippines by Province, 1970-2000," PopulationDimension of Planning, Vol. II, National Census and Statistics Office, 1975.


The age composition of the population by geographicaldivisions is displayed in Table 7. Metropolitan Manilahas the smallest proportion of the population in the ages0-14 and the greatest in the ages 15-64. This region alsohas the oldest population, with a median age of 19.1years, well above the national figure. The Bicol Regionwhich has the largest proportion of the population inthe age group 0-14 (49 per cent) is the youngest region,with a median age of 15.5 years. It is very obvious thatthe Mindanao regions form a very homogeneous groupwith uniform proportions for the various functional agegroups.

Dependency burden. The level and change in theburden of dependency easily influences various socialand economic decisions. It provides a glimpse into theamount of financial pressure on the potential earner.The dependency burden or load, which is the ratio ofthe population aged 0-14 and 65 + to the population ofeconomically-productive ages (commonly defined as theages 15-64), has followed an upward trend since thestart of the present century, a phenomenon consistentwith the high level of fertility in this country and withthe dramatic decline in infant and child deaths.

T»ble 8. Age Structure of the Population

Regions

llocos RegionCagayan ValleyCentral LuzonSouthern LuzonBicol RegionWestern VisayasCentral VisayasEastern VisayasWestern VisayasNorthern MindanaoSouthern MindanaoMetro Manila

AUAges

100:0100.0t100.0100.0100.0.100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

<M

14.317.016.016.417.115.315.316.216.216.617.114.4

5-14

28.331.029.329.531.930.329.331.531.731.330.825.3

by Reglo«, 1970

15-24

18.418.020.219.718.619.218.9.17.119.219.219.724.6

25-49

.25,3.24.624.325.123.024.825.024.5

.25.8- 25.7.25.427.8

50-64

8.86.77.06.46.57.27.77.45A5.55.36.0

65 +

. 4.92.73.22.92.93.23.83.31.71.71.71.9

0-14

42.648.045.345.949.045.544.6

.47.747.9.47.947.939.7

15-64

52.5.49.351.551.248.151.351.649.050.4.50.4.50.458.4

.65 +

4.92.73.22.92.93.23.83.3

. 1.71.71.71.9

Med.Age

. 18.616.317.116.915.517.017.516.2\6SS16.0.16.019.1

SOURCE: National Census and Statistics Office Census Report for 1970.

de Guzman 43

The dependency burden reached a record high of 943dependents for every 1000 persons in the ages 15-64 in1970. The corresponding ratio was 750 in 1903, 872 in1918, 861 in 1939, 898 in 1948, and 939 in 1960. It hasbeen observed that decreases in the aged dependencyburden have not sufficiently offset the increases in thechild dependency burden.

Preschool and school-age population, in the Philip-pines, the minimum age of entrance in school is sevenyears, so persons aged 0-6 comprise the pre-schoolpopulation. In the 1960 census, this group formed 23.8per cent of the total population. Among males, theproportion is 12.3 per cent, while among females it is11.5 per cent. In the 1970 census, this group represented23.6 per cent of the total population, indicating a slightdecline in the relative share of this group by 0.2percentage points over the 10-year period. However,these figures tend to conceal the real situation becausethe number of persons in this age group, in absoluteterms, actually increased by 34 per cent during theintercensal period.

In 1970, the percentage of the population in the ages7-20 was 35.3 per cent while the percentage of the sameages a decade earlier was 34.3 per cent. This means ; thatthe relative share of the population in this group hasbarely changed. Male and female differentials are also in-substantial. But the absolute number of the school-agepopulation increased by a little over 39 per cent between1960 and 1970. The persistent problem of providingeducational opportunities for all is thus quite under-standable.

Female population in the reproductive ages. Theimportant segment of the female population whichinfluences the level of the birth rate is the number ofwomen in the reproductive or childbearing ages, 15-49


years. In 1970, the proportion of female population inthese ages was 46 per cent. The corresponding proportionin 1960 was 47 per cent, which means a decrease of onepercentage point in this group within the ten-yearinterval. Nevertheless, it has been observed that theabsolute number of these women has been increasingand the 1970 census shows a rise by 40 per cent since1960. Such rise is attributable to high fertility andlowered mortality rates which insure an increasinglylarger number of women reaching the childbearing ages.Table 9a. Percentage Distribution of Persons Aged 15 and Over By Age, Sex,

and Marital Status: Philippines, 1960

Age and Sex

MALEAll Ages15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465 +

FEMALEAll Ages15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465 +

Total

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

Marital Status

NeverMarried

35.597.065.527.111.46.14.13.23.02.62.42.4

31.187.344.319.511.68.17.67.07.76.96.86.1

CurrentlyMarried

60.82.9

33.971.686.891.392.191.989.788.184.073.1

60.312.454.578.284.886.483.280.272.268.354.639.5

Widowed

3.30.00.30.81.32.13.34.46.88.7

13.024.0

7.80.10.61.42.74.68.3

11.819.123.937.853.9

Divorced/Separated

0.40.10.30.50.50.50.50.50.50.60.60.5

0.70.20.60.90.90.90.90.90.90.80.90.6

SOURCE: Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Census Report for 1960.

de Guzman 45

Marital Status

Recent findings from the 1973 National DemographicSurvey disclosed the proportions of single and marriedmales, 15 years and over, to be 35.5 per cent and 60.8per cent, respectively (see Tables 9a and 9b). Thecomparable figures for femaies were 31.1 per cent singleand 60.3 per cent married. When compared with the1960 figures, it can be gleaned that the proportions for

Table 9b. Percentage Distribution of Persons Aged 15 and Over by Age, Sex,and Marital Status: Philippines, 1973

Age and Sex

MALEAll Ages15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465 +

FEMALEAll Ages15-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465 +

Marital Status

Total

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

NeverMarried

37.897.372.232.313.47.05.33.93.62.12.42.5

34.791.555.924.813.77.35.96.87.36.87.96.7

CurrentlyMarried

59.52.4

27.366.7 '86.091.692.593.992.192.190.176.2

57.38.3

42.873.282.786.385.882.576.673.466.040.9

Widowed

2.30.00.20.40.61.21.81.83.85.36.9

20.2

6.60.10.10.52.05.15.87.9

14.617.624.951.6

Divorced/Separated

0.40.30.40.60.10.20.40.40.50.60,71.0

1.30.11.2\.S1.72.62.62.81.52.3L20.7



single persons increased whereas the proportions forthose married decreased, irrespective of sex. Thepercentage single among males showed a gain of 2.3percentage points, while the percentage married decreasedby 1.3 percentage points between 1960 and 1973. Amongfemales, the proportion single rose by 3.6 percentagepoints, while the proportion married diminished by 3.0percentage points.

The proportions widowed increased with advancingage. In general, these proportions reflect the higherincidence of widowhood among females and theimprovement in mortality conditions over time.

Table 10. Fcrcents of Females Single by Age, and Singnlate Mean Agesat Marriage, 1903-1973

Age Group

15-1920-2425-2930-3435-394<M445^9?

Singulate Mean Ageat Marriage

Year

1903 1939a 1948 1960 1970 1973

Per Cent Single

73.633.315.615.69.49.47.8

20.9

80.336.215.715.77.47.45.4

21.9

85.140.718.812.69.58.76.9

22.1

87.344.319.511.68.17.67.0

22.3

89.250.321.511.78.07.36.7

22.8

91.555.924.813.77.35.96.8

23.4

"Women with marital status not reported have been removed from thetotal.b45-54 in 1903 and 1939SOURCE: Peter C. Smith, "Evidence of Continuing Nuptiality Change:

New National Data on Marital Status from the 1970 Censusand the 1973 NDS," Research Note No. Il, UPPI, 1974.

The changes in the per cents single among femalesand the singulate mean ages at marriage (SMAM) forthe period 1903-1973 are recorded in Table 10. Asubstantial delay in female age at marriage occurredduring the-1903-1973 period with an acceleration of thetrend during the 1960s and a further accelerationbetween 1970 and 1973. In 1903, about one out of fourwomen in the ages 15-19 was married, but in 1973 one

de.Guzman Al

out of twelve women in the same ages was married.Marriage before age 20 is becoming rarer amongFilipino females. Consequently, the mean age atmarriage has risen from 20.9 years in 1903 to 23.4 yearsin 1973, showing an increase of some 2.5 years over the70-year period. Evidently, much of the change in themarital status of those aged 15-19 occurred prior to1948, whereas the shift involving the women in the agegroup 20-24 and 25-34 occurred just recently.

Nevertheless, marriage in the Philippines remainsalmost universal. In 1973, only about seven per cent ofall women who had reached age 45-49 remained single.The corresponding percentage for 1903 (about 8 percent) shows no substantial change in the proportion ofwomen who choose to remain single.

In an analysis of urban-rural differences in marriagepattern, Smith (1975) found that the index in marriagepattern, Im> in the urban sector experienced greaterdownward shifts than in the rural area. The 1970 urbanindex of marriage pattern in 1970 (0.531) is 31 per centbelow the 1903 national level (0.770). Manila, which wascharacterized by early marriage at the beginning of thepresent century, emerges with the lowest index (0.470),by 1970, almost a third lower than the 1970 rural figureand about two-fifths below the 1903 national index.

Regional patterns in the proportion single among thepopulation and in singulate mean age at marriage(SMAM) by age and sex in 1973 can be seen in Table11. Among females, the highest SMAM was registeredin the Bicol Region (24.6 years), but almost all womenin this region married. Only one per cent of women,45-54 years of age in this region, remained single. Incontrast, Western Visayas reported 15 per cent of theirwomen in the same age group who remained single.

Mean age at marriage was also high in MetropolitanManila (24.5 years). In the ages 15-19, only one out of25 women was married, and among women five years


1

i

i•I *iM

B

late

Sing

u

Em

Sing

lePe

r C

ent

e 3ft

Me

Age

Mar

n45

-40

-44

Si-se

30-3

425

-29

20-2

4

o,

15-

Reg

ions

Fem

ale

•n

CM

O

t |

1223

»oen

es

74

VO

Met

ropo

lita

n M

anil

a

^ ^

VO

IN

VO• *

O í

M

<SVO

r

ON

sp_

0 0

S

lloc

os &

Mt.

Pro

vinc

e

-

ooo

«ri

ooO \

ON

O

O

25es

oo

o

-

8

r-

es

in en00

en

0 0

Cag

ayan

V

alle

y-B

atan

esII

I

VO

Cen

tral

Luz

on

>

o(N

l l

0 0

l

VO

m

oo

15

oo

31.

o

Sout

hern

L

uzon

>

l

es es

m

CM

VO

en

19

rs

16.

Os

S

Bic

ol

>

0 0

enVD

ON

1831

.

r»

57

^.

Si

Wes

tern

Vis

ayas

VII

22

_VO

VO

oo\

o

19.

rn

rn

s

Eas

tern

V

isay

asIIIA

en

22

"

OC

^ *

om

13.

M

enoo

Nor

ther

n M

inda

nao

X

22

.̂en

•nen

VO

_

CN

a

0 0

S

Sou

ther

n M

inda

nao

X

vo

es0 0

u->oo

en

-

vo

sl8

ON

rtfS

ON

O

**

VO

0 0

oo

r-

17

oÎS

„

Mai

e

Met

ropo

lita

n M

anil

allo

cos

& M

t. P

rovi

nce

Í S

en0 0

oo

„.OO

p .

Cag

ayan

Val

ley-

Bat

anes

III

oS

( S

es

VO

VO

o

r)>o

N

»n

CS

m

ON en

-

VO

wnen

0 0

0 0

Cen

tral

Luz

onIV

eS

>n

ses

67

o

Sou

ther

n L

uzon

>

l

es

oo

OO

es

ts

^m

esm

Bic

olV

I

ON

VO

VO

„nON

O

en

.̂

^̂

VJ

re

sc

1

IIA

M

es

vo

»n

vooo

VO

r-

^.ooes

oS

s

Eas

tern

Vis

ayas

VII

I

eses

VO

O

p .

VO

es

r-

es30

^-

VO

VO

S

Nor

ther

n M

inda

nao

IX.

es

oo

»n

•r,w-t

0 0

vo

o30

^.

s;

Sout

hern

Min

dana

o

X

XIc10

"mD

nr~en

Sc/)"5

T3Cm

S

CD

<

Ooí

I!**E

d

o5a.

liiocez>o

C

ter

ta

a.*ï5co'5>0)ce

de Guzman 49

older, only about one out of four was married. Incontrast, Cagayan Valley and Batanes, recording thelowest mean age at marriage (20.1 years), had about oneout of 10 women in the ages 15-19 and almost one outof two women aged 20-24, married. The Mindanaoregions, forming a homogeneous group, exhibited veryminor variations.

In general, women married men three years theirsenior (Panel B, Table 11). The highest mean age atmarriage among men was recorded in MetropolitanManila (27.6 years) and the lowest in Cagayan Valleyand Batanes (23.5 years). The SMAM for males was 2.0years higher than that for females. The overallmale-female difference was 8.4 per cent.

Urban-rural differentials in the singulate mean age atmarriage by regional groupings and by sex wereanalyzed by Smith (1974) using the data from the 1973National Demographic Survey. He demonstrated thatthe urban age at marriage exceeded the rural by 2.9years for females and by 2.5 years for males. Inaddition, there were substantial regional differences formales and females within urban and rural sectors. Heobserved that the urban females had higher singulatemean ages at marriage than the rural females in theBicol Region, Western Visayas, and Southern Mindanao.The urban-rural difference was relatively slight in theCagayan Valley and Batanes area, Central Luzon, andEastern Visayas. For males, the urban-rural differencewas highest in the llocos and Mt. Province. The sexdifference was slightly greater in the rural (11.2 per cent)than in the urban (8.3 per cent) sector in favor of themales. Across regions, the urban male-female differen-ces in SMAM ranged from 2.7 per cent to 15.4 per cent,while the rural sex difference varied from 7.1 per cent to27 per cent.


Household Composition

In the Philippines, a household is defined two ways:as an entire group of persons living together, sharingcommon housekeeping arrangements, or a person livingby himself and having separate and distinct housekeepingarrangements. A household then may consist of one ormore than one family, or of non-related persons, or ofjust one person. A household head is one who reportshimself as such or is so reported by another member ofthe household.

In 1973, there were 6.75 million households as against5.36 million in 1968. This means that the number ofhouseholds rose by 26 per cent over the five-year period.Nine out of 10 households were headed by males, bothin 1968 and in 1973. In 1973, the number of ruralhouseholds (4.72 millions) exceeded the number ofurban households (2.02 millions) by 134 per cent.

Table 12. Percentage Distribution of Households by Number of Persons,1968 and 1973

No. of Persons

All12345678910 or moreNo InformationMean Household Size

1968

100.00.64.38.3

12.613.814.211.210.66.5

11.56.35.8

1973

100.01.45.19.2

13.214.014.612.911.27.4

10.9—6.1

SOURCES: 1968 National Demographic Survey1973 National Demographic Survey

de Guzman 51

Rapid declines in mortality in the absence ofsubstantial fertility declines such as those occurring inmost developing Asian societies have been causingincreases in family and household size in the Philippines.The average household expanded in size from 5.8persons in 1968 to 6.1 persons in 1973. Table 12 showsthe percentage distribution of households by number ofpersons for 1968 and 1973. The relationship starts witha direct one as the number of household membersincreases from one to six persons, beyond this theproportions decline uninterruptedly. A comparison ofthe 1968 and 1973 data reveals an increase in thenumber of large-sized households (six persons or more).In 1973, more than one-half of all households werelarge-sized. Increases in the number of households madeup of six members or more were accompanied byincreases in the number of small-sized households (oneto three persons). Between 1968 and 1973, the numberof one-person households more than doubled and thosewith two or three members rose from 12.6 per cent to14.3 per cent.Table 13. Percentage Distribution of Households by Family Type

and Residence, 1968 and 1973

Family Type

One-Person HouseholdNuclear FamilyStem FamilyJoint/Stem-Joint FamilyHousehold of Related

PersonsHousehold of Unrelated

PersonsTotal

Year and

1968

Total

0.778.117.13.9

0.1

0.1100.0

Urban

0.571.021.76.4

0.2

0.2100.0

Rural

0.781.115.22.8

0.1

0.1100.0

Residence

1973

Total

1.378.013;66.5

0.2

0.3100.0

Urban

1.269.118.210.4

0.3

0.8100.0

Rural

1.581.811.74.9

0.1

100.0



Households are predominantly nuclear. About eightout of 10 households consist of nuclear families (seeTable 13). The incidence of nuclear families is moreprevalent in the rural than in the urban areas, and thedata indicate a widening of the differential. Quiteinterestingly, this is the opposite of what has beenobserved in some developing Asian countries such asThailand (1972), South Korea (1972), and Taiwan(1972), where nuclear families predominate in urbanplaces. The stem family definition was found to be themore common extension than the joint or stem-jointfamily. The former numbered over four times largerthan the latter. However, a decrease was noted in theproportion stem with a corresponding increase in theproportion joint/stem-joint, irrespective of residence.Households of related persons and of unrelated personsremain small, but increases in these types were registeredin 1973.

As shown in Table 14, the median age of householdsheads more or less remained constant overall between1968 and 1973. Increases in the number of householdsheaded by persons aged 15-24 have been noted, butthese were counterbalanced by increases in the pro-portions of households headed by individuals aged 45-54and 65 + . Very slight changes in the median ages wereexhibited when residence is controlled, with the urbanheads getting a bit younger and their rural counterpartsbecoming older.

Using the data from the 1968 National DemographicSurvey, Lim (1973) compared nuclear and extendedhouseholds according to demographic and socio-culturalcharacteristics of household members. Extended house-holds had more members than their counterparts. Themedian number of members for extended householdswas 6.4 persons, while that for nuclear households wasabout five persons. Nuclear households were made up ofyounger individuals. A relatively large proportion of

de Guzman 53

Table 14. Percentage Distribution of Households By Age and Place of Residenceof Household Heads. 1968- and 1973

Age

15-2425-3435-4445-5455-6465 +TotalMedian Age

Residence

1968

Total

2.723.228.721.315.19.0

100.042.9

Urban

3.221.028.223.416.38.8

100.044.0

Rural

2.924.228.920.314.69.0

100.042.4

and Year

Total

4.722.427.521.714.39.4

100.042.8

1973

Urban

3.920.829.020.515.510.2

100.043.2

Rural

5.123.226.922.013.79.0

100.042.6


their members consisted of children aged 0-14. Incomparison, extended households had older members,about 58 per cent in the ages 15-64, against 49 per centin the same ages for nuclear households. This oldercomposition among extended households is beneficialfor economic reasons. Extended households were dis-covered to have higher per capita income, on theaverage, than nuclear households.

Nartatez (1975) examined household size differentialsusing the household head's demographic and socio-economic characteristics. More than 50 per cent ofmarried heads were at the helm of large-sized house-holds (six persons or more), regardless of sex and placeof residence. Household size was positively related withthe education of the head. Relatively more one-personhouseholds were headed by unschooled persons. Headsbelonging to the professional and white-collar occupa-tions had bigger households than those in the blue-collarand farm occupations.

The growth in household size may be expected tocease eventually, with family size starting to, contract,after fertility declines have overtaken mortality declines.As a response to development, average household size

54 , POPULA TION COMPOSITION

increases simply because the average number of survivingchildren increases. One would then expect the family todecrease in size as the level of fertility falls in responseto lower levels of mortality and improved livingconditions (Burch, 1967).

Literacy, Education, andSchool Enrollment

In 1970, over 8 out of every 10 Filipinos (83 percent), aged10 years and over, could read and write a simplemessage. This means a gain of about four per cent inliteracy over the 1960 figure. Expectedly, the proportionliterate among males was higher than females in 1970(85 per cent vs. 82 per cent). The situation in that sameyear showed that the gains achieved since 1960 weregreater for females than for males, inasmuch as 71 percent of all females, 10 years and older in 1960, wereliterate. The corresponding proportion for males was 74 percent.

The urban literacy rate is higher than the rural rate. Aboutone out of three persons in the urban area was literate againstone out of four in the rural sector. The rural populationmanifested a greater male-female differential than the urbanpopulation.

International comparison of enrollment ratios and ofgraduates to total population showed that the Philippineseducates as high a proportion of its people as the advancedcountries in the world. In terms of higher educationenrollment per 100,000 population, the country rankedsecond to the United States and compared favorably withother advanced countries in terms of enrollment ratios forboth elementary and secondary education.

More than half of the population, aged 25 years and over,completed at least a year of elementary education as of 1970,

de Guzman 55

but only 14 per cent finished high school. Only one out of 10has gone through, college. About one-fifth have notcompleted any grade at all. The urbanités were bettereducated than their rural counterparts. In the urban areas,24.0per cent have had high school education and 21 per cententered college. The corresponding figures for the ruralpopulation were nine per cent and four per cent,respectively.

Table 15. Percentage Distribution of Population with College Degrees by Sexand By Major Field of Study, 1910

Field of Study

HumanitiesEducationFine ArtsLawSocial ScienceNatural ScienceEngineeringMedical ScienceAgricultureCourse, Not Stated

Total

Both Sexes

3.744.2

1.14.0

24.20:67.98.11.64.6

100.0

Male

5.123.7

1.88.2

30.10.6

16.95.23.25.2

100.0

Female

2.560.60.60.7

19.20.60.8

10.50.34.2

100.0


In the 1970 census, only three per cent of the totalpopulation reported themselves as having graduated fromcollege. Of this number, 44.3 per cent were males and 55.7per cent were females. As is apparent in Table 15, educationis the most popular area of study, with more than two-fifthsof all professionals holding degrees in this field. There is adearth in the number of professionals in the moredevelopment-oriented courses, with only one out of 12having graduated in the medical sciences, and about thesame number in engineering courses. Surprisingly, onlyabout two per cent had a degree in agriculture, despite thecountry having a predominantly agricultural economy.Other seemingly unattractive fields were the natural sciences(0.6per cent), fine arts(l.l per cent), and the humanities (3.7per cent).


The field of education is the female's preserve, claimingmore than three out of every five female professionals, ascompared to less than one out of four male professionals. Inthe medical sciences, the proportion for females was twicethat for males. In contrast, relatively more males were inengineering (16.9 per cent) and the social sciences (30.1 percent). The corresponding figures for females were 0.8 percent and 19.2 per cent, respectively. The other coursesdominated by males were law, humanities, and fine arts.

In the Philippines, compulsory elementary education isprovided by law. Children are required to attend school fromages seven to 13. In fact, not infrequently, children aged fiveto six are enrolled in school, if not in the elementary school,in the kindergarten. In less than five years between 1972 and1975, the number of children enrolled in elementary schoolsincreased by 11.4 per cent, to reach a level of 7.53 million.

The number of students enrolled in high school in 1972was 1.7 million. Showing the highest rate of growth amongall educational levels (22 per cent), high school enrollmentrose to 2.1 million in 1975, signifying a better holding powerof the schools.

Colleges and universities in the Philippines had anenrollment of 0.69 million in 1972. By 1975, collegeattendance increased to 0.83 million.

While the number of students in all three levels(elementary, secondary, and college) has been increasingrapidly in absolute terms, the proportion attending schoolhas not changed greatly during the period 1972-1975. Totalschool enrolment in 1972 was 9.2 million, representing 23.5per cent of the total population. Three years later, 10.5million students attended school, merely a little over 25 percent of the 1975 population.

de Guzman 57

Ethnicity

Ethnic groups are identified by the first local language ordialect spoken (mother tongue). More than 75 dialects werelisted in the 1970 census.

The most numerous are the Tagalogs, making up 24.4 percent of the total population in 1970. The Cebuanos rankednext with 24.1 per cent. More than one-fifth of thepopulation were Ilocanos (11.3 per cent) and Hiligaynons(10.2 per cent). One out of 14 Filipinos was a Bicolano andone out of 20 was a Waray speaker. The proportion speakingPampango and Pangasinan were 3.3 per cent and 2.3 per centrespectively. The remaining ethnic groups represented 12.8per cent of the entire population.

Religion

As is apparent in Table 16, the Philippines ispredominantly Roman Catholic. Exactly 17 out every 20inhabitants professed this religion in 1970. A very poorsecond is Islam with only 4.3 per cent, followed by Aglipayan(3.9 per cent). Protestants numbered a little over three percent and 1.3 per cent reported themselves as affiliated withthe Iglesia ni Kristo.

Tibie 16. Distribution of Population by Religion and Per Cent Change:1960 and 1970

Religion

AllRoman CatholicProtestantIglesia ni KristoAglipayanIslamBuddhistOthers

1960

Population

27,087,68522,686,096

785,399270,104

1,414,4311,317,475

39,631574,549

PerCent

100.083.82.91.05.24.90.12.1

1970

Population

36,684,48631,169,488

1,122,999475,407

1,436,6881,584,963

33,639863,302

PerCent

100.085.03.11.33.94.30.12.3

Per CentChange

1960-1970

+ 37.4+ 43.0+ 76.0+ 1.6

+ 20.3-15.1

+ 50.2



All religious denominations experienced increasesbetween 1960 and 1970, with the exception of Buddhists.The Iglesia ni Kristo swelled in number by 76 per centsince 1960. Roman Catholics increased by 37.4 per centand Protestants by 43 per cent. The Moslems increasedby one-fifth, while persons reporting no religiousaffiliations and those belonging to other religious groupsaltogether rose by more than a half. Conversely, thenumber of adherents to Buddhism fell by 15.1 per cent.In sum, minor changes occurred in the relative shares ofeach type of religion.

Aliens

Of the total number of inhabitants in the Philippinesin 1970, only 219,438 were registered as aliens, a mere0.6 per cent. These foreigners were mostly Asians(161,151 persons). Chinese led all other nationalitieswith 86,855, followed by the Japanese who numbered51,692. There were 19,192 Americans and 12,402 SouthKoreans.

Europeans, as a whole, numbered 4,044. Aliens fromAfrica and Central America reached about 2,000. SouthAmerica was the region least represented with only 263persons.

The number of males exceeded that of females (52.6per cent as against 47.4 per cent). More than 34 per centwere aged below 15 years. About a fifth was found inthe age group 15-24 and another fifth in the age group25-44. Old persons (65 years and over) were counted tocomprise 4.9 per cent.

de Guzman 59

REFERENCES

Burch, Thomas K. "The Size and Structure of Families:A Comparative Analysis of Census Data." AmericanSociological Review, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 347-363.

Freedman, Ronald and Baron Moots. "Household Sizeand Composition in Taiwan: 1967." Paper preparedfor the Third Organization of Demographic Asso-ciates Workshop, Manila, 1973.

Lee, Hae Young, "Household of Korea, 1960-1966."Paper presented at the Second Organization of Demo-graphic Associates Workshop, Hongkong, 1972.

Lim, Alice C. "A Comparative Study of Nuclear andExtended Households in the Philippines." Unpub-lishedM.A. thesis, University of the Philippines, 1973.

Nartatez, Luisa B. "Patterns, Trenas, and Differentialsin Household Structure and Size: From Two Surveys."Research Note No. 66, University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute, 1975.

Prachuabmoh, Visid and Others. "The Rural and UrbanPopulation of Thailand: Comparative Profiles."Research Report No. 8, December 1972, Institute ofPopulation Studies, Chulalongkorn University, Bang-kok, Thailand.

Smith, Peter C. "Distribution of Population by Age,Sex, and Marital Status, May, 1973: Urban-Rural andRegional Patterns." Research Note No. 19, UPPI,1974.

"Provincialand Urban-Rural Differences in Marriage Pattern: The Evidencefor the 1960s." Research Note No. 49, UPPI, 1975.

POPULATIONDISTRIBUTION

AURORA E. PEREZ

OWING to the country's geographical structure—charac-terized mainly by territorial fragmentation and greatdiversity in land areas—the population of the Philip-pines is unevenly distributed; simultaneous forces havealso contributed to areal differentiation in populationsize and growth. These forces are generally accepted asthe major determinants of regional differences ineconomic potential and growth; they include the basicphysical and climatic conditions, the natural resources,market systems, employment opportunities, transporta-tion facilities and basic demographic traits.

While some areal units are larger than others in size,some incongruencies in growth rates exist. Larger areas.sometimes display growth rates lower than smaller areas.There is an interplay of the above-mentioned forces,leading to areal differentiation in population-relatedaspects of development.

An easy way of presenting the variegated size of thecountry's population is by comparing densities of thecomponent areal units. Although misleading in someways, this crude index of distribution bears importantimplications in drawing the country's population geo-graphy. Other indicators of population distribution are(1) the urban-rural configuration of the population, and(2) the place of birth and /or past residence-currentresidence statistics. Taken altogether, these indices—

61

62 POPULA TION DISTRIBUTION

population size differences, differential growth rates,density variations, urban-rural configuration and place-of-birth and/or past residence/current residence statis-tics—form a pool of suggestive evidences of theunderlying socio-demographic phenomenon that isinternal migration.

Often, the changes in the proportional share of thecountry's total population in fixed areal units is equatedwith mobility over space and the resultant redistributionof population. This chapter focuses on the spatial aspectof population with special emphasis on inter-regionalpopulation movements. Data, as of 1970, are mostly onthe regional level. It should be noted that in some casesthe City of Manila, because of its unique socio- econo-mic stature, forms a twelfth region.

Population Distribution and Size

Regional level. The irregular apportionment of thecountry's total population over its 11 regional divisionssubstantiate the regional similarity/dissimilarity ingrowth rates and density (see Table A).

In 1970, a little over one-fifth of the nation's 36.7million inhabitants settled in the Southern TagalogRegion situated at the central portion of the country.Central Luzon, a neighboring region lying north of theSouthern Tagalog region, with a population of 5.1million, ranked second. Two regions in the Visayangroup of islands, Western and Central Visayas, rankedthird and fifth, respectively. Each had a proportionateshare of 9.7 and 8.3 per cent of the national population.One region of the tripartite Mindanao islands, SouthernMindanao, had a share of 8.4 per cent of the country'spopulation, thus, ranking fourth in regional size ofpopulation.

Provincial level. Of the 67 provinces in 1970, Rizalprovince with a population of 2.8 million was superior

Perez 63

in size to Cebu (the second largest province,) by 42.6 percent. It even surpassed Manila's population by 53.2 percent. It is a well known fact that the province of Rizalhad, during the 60s, a swelling population due to (a) itsreception of the population spilling from the 38.3 squarekilometer confines of the City of Manila, and (b) itsincreasing attractiveness by reason of growing indus-trialization and expansion of manufacturing activities.Other large provinces, though not as industrialized asRizal, are Negros Occidental, Pangasinan, Iloilo, Cota-bato, Leyte, Zamboanga del Sur, and Camarines Sur.Most of these are located in the Visayas and Mindanaoregions possessing agricultural potential which may besubject to development. This potential serves as amagnetic force drawing in contingents of in-migrantsfrom the agriculturally depressed areas.

If the population of these ten largest provinces wereto be combined, well over one-third of the totalpopulation would be accounted for in the country'spopulation geography.

Differential Growth Rates

Regional level. Regional differences in fertility ratesand mortality rates as well as migration rates are themain sources of differential growth rates. During thedecades of the sixties, Southern Mindanao region, whichis the second largest region in land area, grew fastest (atthe rate of 4.72 per cent), followed by the SouthernTagalog region, containing the largest province (Rizal),growing at a rate of 4.14 per cent. The growth of thesetwo regions are illustrative examples of two giant forcesaffecting population growth, outside the natural increaseequation of births minus deaths, namely (1) the"agricultural potential" pull and (2) the "urban" pull.The first is commonly equated to the availability ofland for agricultural development, while the second pull

64 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION

usually refers to the industrial structure of urban areaswhich accommodates further employment. Four otherregions, two in Luzon and two down south inMindanao, grew at rates exceeding the national growthrate of 3.01 per cent.

In a study of inter-regional migration flows (Smith,1975; Perez 1975), the same regions mentioned earlierexhibited the highest in-migration rates in 1970. Onemay derive the correlation between differential growthrates and in-migration rates from such, an observation.

Provincial level. As is commonly observed and whichholds true for the regions, growth rates at the provinciallevel during the 1960-70 decade indicate an interplay offorces of varying intensity that is in accord with a widescale of rates ranging from 0.37 per cent in Catanduanesto 7.70 per cent in Bukidnon. The growth registered forBukidnon implies a rate of change of 113.4 per centover its 1960 population. The repercussions of changehave to be dealt with wisely. Likewise, the growthassimilated by the province of Rizal incurred a relativelyhigh rate of change, 95.3 per cent, within the ten-yearperiod. A policy implication of interest for both publicand private sectors of the country is how to cushion theimpact and consequences of such tremendous populationgrowth so as to keep the adverse effects on thesocio-ecomic structure of such areas to the minimum.

Density

Regional level. At a glance (see Figure l) thedensities of the geographic regions of the Philippinespoint out the importance of how population concentrationgreatly affects the formulation of the nation's regionaldevelopment policies. The density of the Philippines in1970 was found to be 122.3 persons per squarekilometer, assuming the population of 36.7 to be evenlydistributed. Of the 11 regions, six had densities below

Perez 65

the national average and the remaining five were foundto be densely populated. Region III (Central Luzon)located at the central portion of the country and RegionVII (Central Visayas) down in the south, had densitiestwice the national figure. Population pressure is greatlyfelt in Central Visayas since it is the smallest geographicregion, occupying only 5.0 per cent of the country'sland area. Sharp contrast is obtained when the densityof Southern Mindanao (Region XI) is compared. Thisregion is the second largest in land area, yet its densityis three times smaller than that of Central Luzon or ofCentral Visayas.

Provincial level. Manila, considered a separate prov-ince since the Spanish era, remains the primate city.Being the center of trade and commerce as well as theseat of the national government, it has remainedthe most densely populated province. In 1970, it had34,764.4 persons per square kilometer in its 38.3 sq. km.total land area. Rizal province, gaining in populationthrough substantial in-migration, ranked second with itsdensity of 1,529.7 persons per square kilometer. A sharpcontrast is obtained for Palawan, the least denselypopulated of the country's 67 provinces. With a vastland area of 14,896.3 square kilometers goes anextremely low density of 15.9 in 1970, despite a 45.5 percent change in population during the decadal period1960-70.

Urban-Rural Distribution

In many developing countries, most national policiesare geared toward the simultaneous development of theurban and rural sectors. While the process of urbaniza-tion may proceed at faster rates in the more modernizedareas of a country, urbanization in toto for the country,manifests a two-fold aspect: a faster rate of populationgrowth in the rural sector, which upsets the growth of


the urban sector; and a tremendous growth of someselected urban areas, resulting in what is commonlyreferred to as "pseudo-urbanization."

In 1970, the Philippines was said to be 31.8 per centurban and 68.2 per cent rural. This only means thatduring the 20th century, one out of three Filipinos livedin urban areas. Among the 12 regions, Region IV(Southern Tagalog Region) is the most urbanized, withlittle less than half of its total population consideredurban. Central Visayas ranked second with almost onethird of its regional population identified as urban.

As expected, there were more females than males inthe urban sector, only because of the formally organizedemployment structure of the urban sector which absorbsfemale skills, especially in the service industry. In thetwo regions mentioned earlier, the sex ratios were about96.5. The differences in sex ratios are especially sharp inthe working age group and the age of retirement, asshown below.

Table 1. Sex Ratios By Broad Age-Groups and Locale, 1970

Locale

Urban

Rural

Both Sectors.

Age Group

0-14

1,029

1,034

1,033

15-64

889

993

956

65 +

875

1,000

960

All Ages

945

1,012

990

SOURCE: National Census and Statistics Office, 1970 Census Report.

Note: For a graphic presentation of the Philippines' urban-rural populationdistribution over these broad age groups, please see Figure 2.

In a study of Philippine urbanization, Pernia (1975),identified three paces in the overall trend: a period ofrelatively moderate growth of the urban sector duringthe first four decades of the 20th century, a period ofrapid growth during the 40s and the 50s and a slackeningof growth during the decade of the 60s. An exception to

Perez 67

this slowing down in urban growth, however, was theincreasing concentration of population in the Metropoli-tan Manila Area.

Should the pace and tempo of urbanization continuethe slow and moderate tempos suggest a near tripling ofthe country's 1970 urban population by the year 2000.

Residence Data

The major sources of migration data are birthplacestatistics and residence data for the years 1960, 1965,and 1970 recorded during the 1970 census of populationand housing. Census tabulations of birthplace/pastresidence-current residence show that in 1960, 12.8 percent of the population of all ages was living in a regiondifferent from that of birth. This proportion increasedto 13.5 per cent during the latter census enumeration.According to the 1960 census, about 3.5 million personswere enumerated in a place other than the place ofbirth. In the following censal count, these personsnumbered 4.9 million, 71.2 per cent of which negotiatedinter-provincial transfers, and 53.1 per cent accountedfor inter-regional shifts of population.

Clearly, the population continues to be mobile atrelatively significant levels. Doubtless, the consequencesand impact of these changes in residence remain mattersof import confronting local policy makers as well asurban planners.

Internal Migration

Social scientists of late have shown considerableconcern about the relatively neglected role of spatialmobility in the socio-economic development of acountry. The demographer's preoccupation has includedinternal migration as (1) a key factor effecting populationchange; (2) a variable inducing population redistribution


and residential relocation in different geographic areas;and (3) an adjustive mechanism concomitant togrowth and development. It is in the light of the secondand third attributes that this chapter on populationdistribution and internal migration is essayed. A fairattempt is made at establishing the link betweenpopulation movement and the process of urbanizationhere viewed as an index of development affectingpopulation distribution.

Volume

Migration is definitely not a rare experience amongFilipinos. As was stated earlier one individual, out ofeight, was living in a region in 1960 other than that ofbirth. In 1970, this proportion rose to one out of seven.And for a much shorter migration interval—from 1960to 1970—one person in twelve, approximately 8.3 percent of the population aged 10 years old and over, hadmoved to another region.

Generally speaking, there is supposedly an inverserelationship between distance and migration. Table Bsubstantiates this common assertion as it provides somedifferences in the volume of migration by region ofresidence in 1970 and by distance of the moves, definedby transfers across migration-defining areas in thecountry. The net lifetime migration rate among theenumerated population in 1970 varies according to themigration-defining area referred to.

As gleaned from the table, the inverse relationshipbetween geographical distance and migration is reflectedby the differential rates:

• 24.8 per cent in terms of transfers across municipalboundaries (column 1);

• 17.6 per cent when based on movements acrossprovincial borders (column 2); and

Perez 69

• 13.6 per cent (column 3) when migration is definedin terms of regional boundaries.

But this observation is nevertheless further qualifiedby a central observation derived by comparing thecolumns of the same table—the dominance of long-distance movements involving either inter-provincial orinter-regional transfers. Thus, if the total of lifetimemigrants is regarded as composed of those whonegotiated transfers across municipal borders, 71.2 percent (column 6), moved to another province while 53.1per cent (column 7), moved to another region. Of thetotal lifetime inter-provincial migrants in 1970, 76J7 percent (column 9), changed their regions of residence.

Similar information is obtained for migrants duringthe decade of the 60s among those aged 10 years oldand over in 1970. During this period, 16.5 per cent(column 4) of the population experienced relocation ofmunicipal residences while a lower proportion, 111 percent (column 5), changed provincial addresses. Of thetotal inter-municipal migrants during the decade, sometwo-thirds, roughly 66.1 per cent (column 10), movedinto another province.

Factors motivating individuals to move may havechanged and directions of these movements might havealtered considerably; however, the dominance of long-distance movements that prevailed before 1960 (Pascual,1966; Smith, 1973) continue to be a major migratorytrait of the population in the 1960s.

Broad Inter-Regional Flows

The more significant flows as pointed out by Smith(1975) from a historical perspective, are those acrossconsiderable distances. Prevailing regions of destinationare areas defining three broad regional divisions of thecountry: Luzon (regions I to V and XII); Visayas(regions VI-VIII); and Mindanao (regions IX to XI).

The data below summarizes the difference in volume


between earlier and more recent migration acrossregional boundaries (all numbers are in thousands):

Number enumerated

Total 12-region flowl

Flow over broad regional boundaries

Per cent of inter-regional flowwhich is over broad regionalboundaries

Birth-to-1960(All Ages)

27,007

3,452

1,715

49.7

1960-IO-1970(Popn. 10 + )

25,076

2,092

922

44.1

SOURCE: 1970 Census Migration Tables.1The City of Manila is treated as an independent region.

A detailed description of the inter-regional migrationstreams and counterstreams is in itself cumbersome.Figures 3 and 4 lay out the volume of in-migration andout-migration for each of the regions in the countryduring two migration intervals: birth-to-1960 and 1960-to 1970.

The salient features of Philippine inter-regionalmigration are the following:

• Dominance of long-distance movements;• Frontier settlement of the Mindanao area and a

response to the "pull" forces in more urbanized areasbefore 1960;

• A simultaneous suburban movement from the coreof the metropolitan region (Manila) to contiguous areaseconomically linked with the metropolitan center after1960; and

• Decreasing stream effectiveness after 1960.

Long-distance Movements

Of special interest among the lifetime inter-regionalmigrants in 1960 is the preferred destination of the

Perez 71

mobile Visayan (regions VI-VIII) population. Therewere more who settled in any one of the tripartiteMindanao area (regions IX-XI) than in any othersurrounding Visayan island. Percentages of out-migrantsheaded for Mindanao before 1960 contrast sharply withthe much less significant flow of inter-regional movementwithin the Visayas area composed of Western, Central,and Eastern Visayas. In fact, the percentage distributionof the Visayan migrants, especially those coming fromWestern Visayas show preference for the SouthernTagalog region and the City of Manila than the nearbyVisayan towns.

Percent of migrants fromthe Visayas going to

WESTERN VISAYAS

IV. Southern TagalogVII & VIII. Central & Eastern

VisayasIX to XI. Tripartite Mindanao

RegionXII. City of Manila

CENTRAL VISAYAS

IV. Southern TagalogV. Bicol

VI & VIII. Western & EasternVisayas

IX to XI. Tripartite MindanaoRegion

EASTERN VISAYAS

IV. Southern TagalogV. Bicol

VI & VII. Western & CentralVisayas

IX to XI. Tripartite MindanaoRegion

XII. City of Manila

Birth-to-1960

17.6

5.5

62.410.5

4.43.0

8.9

79.7

23.02.4

8.2

44.618.4

Period

Ï960-to-1970

27.4

8.3

50.28.6

11.32.7

10.1

69.6

36.52.2

6.8

31.714.3

PercentagePoint

Difference

+ 9.8

+ 2.8

-12.2-1.9

+ 6.9-0.3

+ 1.2

-10.1

+ 13.5-0.2

-1.4

-12.9-4.1

SOURCE: 1960 and 1970 Census Migration Tables.


Another illustrative example is the long-distancemovement made by the Ilocanos;1 Out-migrants fromthe llocos region were found in Southern Luzon and thenearby Cagayan Valley region. Between these twodestination areas, however, there were more migrantsflocking to the farther of the two, Southern Tagalog,than in the neighboring region, as shown below.

Trend of Movement

Before 1960. It has been documented in past researchand studies that a bulk of the geographic mobility wasinduced. An examination of regional net migration ratesunderscores the settlement of the frontier areas, mostlyof Mindanao, via government intervention. In reality,this was a national policy that had for its aimaccelerated growth of the once-neglected region.

V A cultural group originating from the llocos region located in thenorthern tip of the country- well known for their love of adventure.

Percent of Migrants fromthe llocos Going to

II. Cagayan ValleyIII. Central LuzonIV. Southern Luzon

IX to Xl! Tripartite MindanaoRegion

XII. City of Manila

Birth-to-1960

25.015.426.2

19.213.7

1960-to-1970

20.014.237.1

15.39.7

PercentagePoint

Difference

-5.0-1.2

+ 10.9

-3.9-4.0

SOURCE: 1960 and 1970 Census Migration Tables.

Perez 73

Table 2. Rates (percentages) and Rank-Order of In- Migration, Out-migration,and Net Migration Birth-to-1960, in the Philippines, by Region.«

Region

I. llocosII. Cagayan Valley

III. Central LuzonIV. Southern TagalogV. Bicol



XL Southern MindanaoXII. City of Manila

In-Mlgratfon

Rates

3.5015.774.09

19.413.482.273.151.82

29.3016.6537.8045.44

Rank

86749

1110123521

Oat-Migration

Rales

13.946.65

13.834.728.39

14.2624.3513.206.87

12.714.08

11.25

Rank

495

108326

117

121

NetMigration

Rates

-11.4410.28

-10.7016.70-5.22

-13.07-24.58-11.5830.655,61

43.9118.63

Rank

95847

1112102613

SOURCE: 1960 Census Migration Tables.

The rates particularly present a cancelling of the neteffects of the heavy influx of persons to the City ofManila. Thus, even if it had the highest volume in termsof in-migration rates, it only ranked third in terms ofnet migration rate. The opposite trend however, standstrue and of comparative advantage to the Mindanaoregions, especially for Southern Mindanao.

The Southern and Western Mindanao regions drewmore settlers than sent migrants elsewhere. Movementsbefore 1960 were primarily pioneer settlement types.This is congruent with the idea that agriculturalpotential is a migration-inducing factor. This was thecase for Mindanao's vast lands that were still uninhabi-ted before 1960.

After I960. An outstanding feature of recent socialchange is the relatively rapid development of urbanareas. Corollary to this process is the sustained massivein-migration to major urban centers. The exodus ofpopulation from rural areas to urban centers has beencommonly viewed as an explanatory variable in thephenomenal growth of city population.


Attendant to the fast tempo of social change in thedecade of the 60s was the shift of movement from anurban center, exemplified by the City of Manila, to thegeographically contiguous areas within commutingdistance, mostly located in the Southern Tagalog region.During the 1970 census, there was a general decrease inthe flow of people to Manila accompanied by asubstantial outflow of population from its crowdeddistricts. There occurred a 44.9 per cent increase in theoutflow of population from the densely inhabited urbancenter and a corresponding 16.1 per cent change in theinflow of population to the "once attractive" centralcity.

Table 3. Rates (percentage) and Rank- Order of In-Mlgration, Ont-Migration,and Net Migration 1960-to-1970, in the Philippines, by Regions

Region

I. llocosII. Cagayan Valley

III. Central LuzonIV. Southern TagalogV. Bicol



XI. Southern MindanaoXII. City of Manila

Iii-Migration

Rates

3.845.784.88

14.833.862.274.022.887.84

10.9314.5721.66

Rank

106729

128

115431

OntMigration

Rates

9.614.356.883.507.648.73

12.7611.574.825.424.30

34.07

Rank

4107

12652398

111

NetMigration

Rates

-6.181.50

-2.1212.47-4.016.83

-9.54-9.363.226.00

11.34-17.20

Rank

856179

1110432

12

SOURCE: 1970 Census Migration Tables.

Southern Tagalog region, on the other hand, rankedsecond, twelfth, and first in terms of in-out-and netmigration rates during the decade. These rankings areadditional evidence for the accepted and establishedtrend that the City of Manila has been losing populationthrough out-migration as early as the 50s (Pascual,1972; Zosa, 1973).

Perez 75

Of the total loss of 453,925 persons, SouthernTagalog received 65.8 per cent representing some298,708 persons. Of this number, 78.16 per cent were tobe found in the urban sector of the region, while 20.81per cent were residing in the rural sector of the region(Perez, 1975).

These data indicate the spread of progress to theperiphery of the fast developing and expanding Metro-politan Manila Area. Meeting the ever increasingdemands of the population for urban services andfacilities has resulted in a thinning out of green landwithin the region.

Stream Effectiveness

It is often desirable to calculate indices that permitcomparisons of migratory flows. One such measurementis the Index of Effectiveness which relates net migrationto turnover.

In an analysis of inter-regional migration from censusdata, Smith (1975) observed that flows before 1960 werecharacterized by a fair degree of effectiveness whereas-flows in the 1960s tended to cross-cancel and aretherefore, of lower effectiveness. Several indicators of over-overall effectiveness were calculated, as shown in thefollowing page.

The 12-region system frame indicates that 12.8 percent of the population changed region between birth and1960 with a net displacement effect (measured by theindex of dissimilarity) of 7.9 per cent. Index ofEffectiveness was at a high of 63. In the 1960s, 8.3 percent of all persons, 10 years old and over, changedregion of residence yet the net displacement generatedby such transfers was only 3.8 per cent. Inter-regionalmigration during the decade yielded a comparatively lowstream effectiveness of 46. A similar pattern waslikewise observed for the three-broad region system.


Twelve region system2. Per cent changing region2. Index of Displacement a

3. Index of Effectiveness b

4. Index of Exchange Migration c

Three broad regions1. Per cent changing regions2. Index of Displacement »3. Index of Effectiveness b

4. Index of Exchange Migration c

Birth to 1960

12.87.9

63.01.62

6.45.2

82.01.23

1960 to 1970(Pop 10 + )

8.33.8

46.02.18

3.72.2

59.01.68

aThis is the Index of Dissimilarity comparing distributions across areas ofpopulation by residence at two points in time

b|ndex of Effectiveness =net in-migrants

Total inter-area migrantsx 100

per cent changing regionclndex of Exchange =

Index of Displacement

The high stream effectiveness that characterized thepre-1960 flows reinforces the dominance of longdistance movements in an era of pioneer settlement.The following table reveals that the stream effectivenessis reduced greatly by the distance involved in themovement.

Table 4. Index of Effectiveness of Selected Migration Streams Before andAfter 1960

Long-Distance Movements

Western Visayas (VI)to Southern Mindanao (XI)

Central Visayas (VII)to Southern Mindanao (XI)

Short-Distance Movements

Northern Mindanao (X)Southern Mindanao (XI)

Central Visayas (VII)Western to Visayas (VI)

Before 1960

990

971

383

298

After 1960

960

941

316

138

Perez 11

Clearly, migration flows after 1960 reflect the negativeeffect of stream-counterstream ratio on stream effective-ness. The ratio of stream to counterstream linkingRegions VI and XI, for instance, declined from 200 to 1(birth-to-1960) to 12:1 (1960-to-1970). For short-distancemovements like the interchange of population within theVisayan group of islands, the ratio is much less lopsidedbecause of the cancelling effect of the substantialcounterflow, as indicated by the stream-counterstreamratio of 2:1 in 1960 and equality in 1970.

In a separate analysis of inter-regional migration usingdata from the National Demographic Survey of 1973(Pernia, 1976), a more detailed analysis of streameffectiveness was presented. The origins and destinationsof the flows were taken into account. It was found thatrural-to-metropolitan streams were by far more effectivethan rural-to-urban streams. Both flows were femaledominant after 1965 when differentiated by sex.

Table 5. Index of Effectiveness of Migration Streams Birth to-1965 and1965-to-1973, By Sex and Type of Migration Flow.

Type of MigrationFlow and Sex

Rural-to-Urban

Both SexesMalesFemales

Rural-to-Metropolitan a

Both SexesMalesFemales

Migration Interval

Birth-to-1965

517509252

777777776

1965-to-1973

394322447

491397554

Difference

-123-187M95

-286-380-222

SOURCE: 1973 National Demographic Survey Migration Tables.

Metropolitan is a close approximation of the National Economic Develop-ment Authority's (NEDA) definition of Manila Metropolitan Area whichincludes the cities of Manila, Caloocan, Pasay and Quezon, the suburbanmunicipalities of Makati, Mandaluyong, Navotas, San Juan, Marikina,Malabon, Parañaque, Pasig, and Taguig located in the province of Rizal;and the municipality of Valenzuela in Bulacan province. This definition isnow in current use in a research consortium "Population, Resources,Environment, and the Philippine Future " (PREPF).


Overall, there was a reduction of stream effectivenessafter 1965 which may be interpreted thus: thatdevelopments since the 60s induced greater propensitiesfor return movement; a second view may be thatdevelopments in transportation and communicationincreased favorable circumstances for return movement,as suggested by Lewis (1971) and Simkins and Wernstedt(1971). Still a third view may be postulated withparticular reference to the 2.9 percentage points gain ofthe Metropolitan to rural flow after 1965 (see Table 7 ).It may be that the increasing housing density in thealready overcrowded metropolitan center stimulatedsubstantial return movement. Viewed in the light ofsome "dispersal" policies implemented thus far, it couldmean the relocation or establishment of industrialconcerns outside but within commutable distance fromthe metropolitan area.

The underlying sociological significance of thesepopulation movements is open for exploration andfurther study.

Internal Migration and Development

There are at least two ways by which the course of thecountry's growth and development is affected by thevolume and direction of migratory movements. Thesetwo processes—stemming partly from spatial mobility—are, the suppuration of the frontier settlement and, theaccentuated tempo of urbanization, a vehicle of economictransformation. While the former ends the era of anagriculturally based "pioneer settlement," the latterbegins the era of an industrially based "urban trek."

Within the context of the commonly acceptedrural-urban dichotomy, the National DemographicSurvey of 1973 provides an overview of the rural/urbanpatterns of internal migration in the country.

A graphic presentation of the types of migration

Perez 79

streams before and after 1965 is contained in Figure 5.The working .definition of rural-urban1 used during thesurvey is a variant of the established census definition.It elevated the level of national urbanization in 1970 to39.1 per cent, a level 6.2 and 7.3 per cent higher thanthe 1963 and 1970 census level of national urbanization.

As gleaned from special tabulations ( Table 7 )pre-1965 movers were more conservative2 than innova-tive.3 A slightly larger proportion—32.6 per cent—ofthe pre-1965 movers with rural origins were headed foranother rural area. Only 29.9 per cent moved into urbanareas as revealed in Figure 5. This observation reflectsthe preponderance of males in the pioneering kind ofmigration streams. A sharp contrast in the age-specificsex ratios recorded in the accompanying table isobtained for the conservative and innovative movers.

Table 6- Age Specific SexBirth-to-1965

Type of MigrationStream

Rural-to RuralRural-to-UrbanRural-io-Meiro Manila

Ratios by Typ« of Stream for Lifetime Migrants,

Age Group

15-24

106.773.590.3

25-34

100.798.073.9

35^»9

97.583.192.8

50 •*

148.8106.2129.2

Total

110.489.595.7


The large differences in the age-specific sex ratiosidentify a differential in the structure of employmentopportunities between urban and rural destinations.

'The survey considered the areal sub-units of Metropolitan Manila, char-tered cities, and all poblaciones as urban; all barrios were treated ascomponents of the rural area.

Conservative migration refers to mobility which involves movement withinthe traditional or within the modern sector, and movement from themodern to the traditional sector.

Innovative migration is that spatial mobility involving movement from thetraditional (rural) sector to the modern (urban) sector with goals ofachieving the new.


With the proliferation of service industries in the urban,areas, especially in the Metropolitan Manila Area, theresultant sex ratio for the age group 25-34 is particularlylow.

The more recent flows, however, present evidencecounter to the earlier frontier settlement. During theperiod 1965-73, rural-to-urban migrants were the mostsignificant in volume. One-fourth of the total streamswere of this type, as shown in Table 7,Table 7. Percentage Distribution and Rank-Order of Migration Streams for

two Intervals: Lifetime, Birth-to-1965 and Period, 1965-ÍO-1973

Type of Stream

ConservativeRural-RuralUrban-RuralManila-RuralUrban-Urban

Innovative

Rural-UrbanRural-Manila a

urban-Manila

Birth-to-1965

49.932.69.51.76.1

50.1

29.913.66.6

Rank

1476

235

1965-to-1973

44.019.711.24.68.5

55.9

25.713.516.7

Rank

2576

143

PercentagePoint

Difference

-5.9-12.9

1.72.92.4

5.8-4.2-0.110.1

SOURCE: 1973 National Demographic Survey Migration Tables

¿Manila here refers to the PREPF definition of Metropolitan Manila area, asexplained in Table 5.

Concomitant with preceding observations, periodmigration streams were more innovative than conserva-tive. A significant 55.9 per cent of the total streams in1973 involved one of two destinations—urban orMetropolitan Manila. This change in direction ofmigratory flows conforms to Zelinsky's (1971) structuraland spatial mobility transition which states that there isan upward mobility, i.e. innovative movement, asdevelopment processes like urbanization, modernization,or industrialization are taking place. This upwardmobility partially results from the rising socio-economicaspirations which accompany development.

Perez 81

The percentage share of rural-urban migratory flowsdecreased in volume but remained a majority bulk ofthe total flows. An interesting trend during the period1965-73 elucidates the argument regarding the emergenceof an inter-urban system of movement from which asystem of urban centers through migration may begenerated. Attention should be drawn to the fact thatdevelopment of better transportation and communicationfacilities established linkage of smaller urban areascontiguous to the urban center. For instance, thepercentage share of urban-Metro Manila flow was twicelarger than the inter-urban (excluding Metro Manila) in1973 (Table 7).

Apparently, the urban-Metro Manila streams weremore female-dominant. Sex ratios of urban-urbanstreams were even higher. But sex ratios for rural-urbanmigrants still remain the lowest, as attested by Table 8.

Table 8. Age-specific Sex Ratios of Migration Streams for Period Migrants,1965-to-1973

Type of MigrationStream

Rural-urbanUrban-urbanUrban-Metro Manila

Age Group

15-24

45.251.765.0

25-34

79.794.782.3

35-49

94.1117.391.4

50+

117.2132.994.0

Total

67.184.278.1


" or "urban-The terms "rural-urban," "urban-urban,metropolitan" migration usually connote development.Indeed, the direction of migratory flows focuses on thephenomenon of distressed areas, and underscores theurban trek, which to most migrants often proves to beeconomically rewarding and personally gratifying.


Though it may be a case of oversimplifying thephenomenon, the analysis of population movementbetween and among "richer" (more developed) and"poorer" (less developed) regions in the Philippinesunderlines the distinctively integral function of internalmigration to development. In a study of migration,using Philippine census data, Zachariah (1975) pointedout the inverse relationship between migration and levelof economic development and the higher level of spatialmobility among the more developed regions as measuredby the volume of migration. Using data on FamilyIncome Expenditures in 1971, the regions were classifiedas "poor" (less developed) and "rich" (more deve-loped).1

For present purposes, movements may either beinter-movement or intra-movement,2 confined to theexchange of population between and among the regionsas classified. Data presented in Table C indicate thefollowing:

• Of the total movements in 1960, 48.7 per centaccounted for transfers between the LDRs and theMDRs while 51.3 per cent were movements within theLDRs and the MDRs;

• A higher level of mobility within the MDRs, as itaccounted for 90.9 per cent of total intra-movements;and

• A greater interchange of population from the LDRsto the MDRs. This flow amounted to 85.0 per cent oftotal inter-movements. The counter stream was six timessmaller in size and volume.

1"Poor" or "less" developed regions (LDR) are those with annual familyincome of less than P2,000; "rich" or "more developed regions" (MDR) arethose with annual family income above P2,000.o

"Inter-movement" refers to population transfers between an MDR andan LDR, while "intra-movement" refers to population transfers within anLDR or an MDR.

Perez 83

The same trend is obtained during the period 1960-70.As was true before 1960, the more dominant stream wasthe outflow from the LDRs to the MDRs. Roughly, theratio was three streams to an MDR to every streamflowing to an LDR. With regard to intra-movements, ahigher level of mobility was still pronounced for theMDRs. While movement between LDRs was only 7.4per cent, migration between MDRs soared to 92.6 percent.

Overall, the data yield the following general observa-tions descriptive of the direction of migratory flows inthe Philippines:

• A concentration of in-migrants among the moredeveloped regions and a corresponding massive outflowof people from the less developed regions;

• A higher level of mobility among the moredeveloped regions; and

• A more significant exchange of population, in termsof volume, between the more developed regions. Allthese are characteristics of developing nations.

The last observation is of particular interest toresearchers devoted to urban structure in relation tomobility between the more developed regions. Definite-ly, there exist strong links between the two processes,which to some extent, determine whether or not suchmobility promotes the interests of the economy. Moreso, because these processes are basic to a properlygrounded perspective of future regional development.

ConclusionAs a whole, the various data presented herein indicate

substantial spatial mobility in the Philippines. Thevolume and direction of migratory movements bespeaksocio-economic changes concomitant to nationaldevelopment. And the evaluation of these changesentails knowledge and perception of population redis-tribution as it has proven to be a matter of consequence.


The implications of such observed trends are addressedto policy-makers as well as planners in relation tosignificant aspects such as the effect of populationmovements on the shape of urban growth; the meaningof migration from the "less developed" regions to the"more developed" regions on regional policy; and thegenerated cost-benefits of movement among the indivi-duals who move on one hand and those who elect tostay, on the other.

The broad policy issue, however, is not whethergeographic mobility of the country's population shouldbe encouraged or discouraged, but rather how itseffectiveness can be strengthened and its adverse effectsboth at origin and destination be reduced to theminimum.

Table A. Population, Land Area and Density or the Philippin

Region

I. HocosII. Cagayan Valley

III. Central LuzonIV. Southern TagalogV. Bicol Region

VI. Western VisayasVII. Cental Visayas

VIII. Eastern VisayasIX. Western VisayasX. Northern Mindanao

Xf. Southern MindanaoTotal, All Regions

Population

1950

1,303,4371,202,0663,690,9965,502,2402,362,7073,078,3052,522,8022,040,9661,350,7312,111,2911,922,142

27,087,685

1970

1,604,4181,691,4595,100,0958,325,2472,966,8813,618,3263,032,7192,381,4091,869,0143,016,8653,078,053

36,684,486

Per CentDistribution

1960

4.814.44

13.6320.318.72

11.369.317.534.997.797.10

99.99

1970

4.374.61

13.9022.698.099.868.276.495.108.228.39

99.99

es by Region

Inter-CensalGrowthRale (%)

2.053.403.224.142.251.591.821.523.233.554.723.01

-.Censal Years 1960 and 1970

U n dArea(Insq.km.)

16,200.336,403.123,646.047,513.117,632.520,223.214,951.521,431.718,685.139,844.943,468.0

300,000.0

Density

196«

80.4633.02

156.09115.80134.00152.22168.7395.2372.2952.9944.2290.29

1970

99.0446.46

215.69175.22168.26178.92202.84111.12100.0375.7270.81

122.28

SOURCE: Bureau oftheCensusand Statistics, Special Report No. 3,1972.

Perez 85

OcJOo

oCD3V)c(A

0)

o.

0)

a.c3T3ccr

CD

a.Sa-

5'

¡¡¡mo " °

f-sf

. ".&. La — co b

!

äsII5

hB

II

SI-'"

ii?

B

5?5"

ISB

3|

«»aBO

InB.o

S

tart*


Table C. Lifetime and Period Migration Between litas Developed and More DevelopedRegions in the Philippines: Birth-to-1960 and 196O-IO-1970

Region

LESS DEVELOPED REGIONSTotal inter-regional move

ments for all LDR'sFrom LDR's to MDR'sBetween LDR's

MORE DEVELOPED REGIONSTotal inter-regional move-

ments for all MDR'sFrom MDR's to LDR'sBetween MDR's

TOTAL OUT-MIGRATIONTOTAL INTER-MOVEMENTS *TOTAL 1NTRA-MOVEMENTS

LESS DEVELOPED REGIONSTotal inter-regional move-

ments for all LDR'sFrom LDR's to MDR'sBetween LDR's

MORE DEVELOPED REGIONSTotal inter-regional move-

ments for all MDR'sFrom MDR's to LDR'sBetween MDR's

TOTAL IN-MIGRATIONTOTAL INTER-MOVEMENTSTOTAL INTRA-MOVEMENTS

Number

1,589,3851,428,017

161,368

1,862,358251,562

1,610,7963,451,7431,679,5791,772,164

412,930251,562161,368

3,038,8131,428,0171,610,7963,451,7431,679,5791,772,164

1960

Per Cent Per Cent Number

OUT-MIGRATION

46.0585.029.11

53.9514.9890.89

100.00100.00100.00

100.0089.8510.15

100.0013.5186.49

100.00 ;48.6651.34

824,419741,44582,974

,267,184234,035

,033,149.,091,603

975,480,116,123

IN-MIGRATION

11.9614.989.11

88.0485.0290.89

100.00100.00100.00

100.0060.9239.08

100.0046.9953.01 1

317.009234,03582,974

,774,594741,445

,033,149100.00 2,091,60348.6651.34 1

975,480,116,123

1960-1970

Per Cenl

39.4276.017.43

60.5823.9992.57

100.00100.00100.00

15.1623.997.43

84.8476.0192.57

100.00100.00100.00

Per Cent

100.0089.9410.06

100.0018.4781.53

100.0046.6453.36

100.0073.8326.17

100.0041.7858.22

100.0046.6453.36

NOTE: a-refers to population transfers from an LDR to an MDRb-refers to population transfers between LDRs or between MDRs.

SOURCES: Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Housing and PopulationCensus, 1970; Bureau of the Census and Statistics, AnnexTable on Migration, Housing and Population Census, 1960.

Perez 87

Figure 1.Density Map

of the PhilippinesBy Regions


Ul

Ul

O)

111

wmr-r

ismmmmmm*WM

H1

finyÊÊÊm

wÊwWÊ

WÊm

têÉÜÜwÊw

WESH

EÜÜ

B

09

O

2« s.S«o. __

5 g11

2soc

AL

LA

GE

S +in

15

-64

0-1

4

Perez 89

/ * \

-M» \L E S E N D :

IN MIORATION

OUT MIGRATION

Figure 3. Volume of Lifetime Migration, Birth-to-1960in Philippine Regions: 1960 Census


L E G E N D !

IN MIORATION

OUT MIGRATION

Figure 4. Volume of Period Migration, 1960-to-1970 inPhilippine Regions: 1970 Census

Perez 91

z

oEl-

oE

4E3K

Z4taE3

Z4

URBAN

RURAL

z3

4E

RURAL

O

i5.

the

wn

Km

¡3

-os?

a

mm


REFERENCES

Lewis, Henry T. Ilocano Rice Farmers: A ComparativeStudy of Two Philippine Barrios. Honolulu, Univer-sity of Hawaii Press, 1971.

Pascual, Elvira M. "Urbanization in the Philippines."Paper submitted at the SEADAG Population Seminaron Urban Focus. Pattaya, Thailand, 1972.

Perez, Aurora E. "Internal Migration in the Philip-pines." Paper submitted to Organization of Demo-graphic Associates, East and Southeast Asia, for theIntegrated Manuscripts on Internal Migration andUrbanization Country Report, 1975.

Pernia, Ernesto M. "Indicators of Philippine Urbaniza-tion in the 20th Century." PREPF Research NoteNo. 3, University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute. Manila, 1975.

"Philippine Migration Streams:Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics."PREPF Research Note No. 11, University of thePhilippines Population Institute. Manila, 1975.

Simkins, Paul D. and Wernstedt, Frederic L. "Philip-pine Migration: The Settlement of the Digos-PadadaValley, Davao Province." Monograph Series No. 16.Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 1971.

Smith, Peter C. "Interregional Migration: Lifetime and1960-1970: Magnitudes of Total Streams". PREPFResearch Note No. 3Í, University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute. Manila, 1975.

Zachariach, K.C. "Migration in the Philippines withParticular Reference to Less Developed Regions of theCountry". (Mimeograph). Prepared for the WorldBank, 1975.

Perez. 93

Zelinsky, Wilbur. "The Hypothesis of the MobilityTransitions." Geographical Review, 61, 2 April, 196).

Zosa, Imelda A. "A Multivariate Analysis of MigrationFlows in the Philippines." Paper presented at the 3rdWorkshop of Organization of Demographic AssociatesManila, 1973.

LABOR FORCEIMELDA A. ZOSA

PHILIPPINE labor force statistics can be obtained fromtwo main sources: censuses conducted since I9601 andregular household surveys begun in 1956. This discussionmakes use of census results from 1960 and 1970 only.2

Although some enumeration procedures varied, basicdefinitions used in these two censuses are similar. Usingas reference period the week before enumeration, allpersons 10 years old and over were categorizedaccording to labor force status. Those categorized asemployed and unemployed were members of the laborforce while housekeepers, students, the disabled and theretired were non-labor force members.

Persons working for wages, salaries, profits orcommissions, as well as without pay in a family or farmenterprise, constituted the employed. However, thisgroup also included those with jobs but not workingeither because they were temporarily absent or on leave,or still due to report for a definite assignment or work.Classified mainly as unemployed were those not workingbut wanting and looking for work. Those not workingand not looking for work but indicating the desire foremployment were also grouped among the unemployed.1 Earlier censuses utilized the "usual occupation" approach. Please refer tothe 1939 and 1948 publications listed at the end of the text.

2The 1960 and 1970 data used in the discussion are taken from the corre-s ponding census volumes.

95

96

Size of the Labor Force

LABOR FORCE

Data from the 1960 census show that about 31.5 percent of all persons in the country were categorized aslabor force members (Table 1). The proportion for1970 was slightly higher (33.5 per cent). The number inthe labor force actually swelled from 8,536,000 in 1960to 12,300,435 in 1970. This increment of nearly4,000,000 workers indicated a decadal change of about44.1 per cent, a level slightly higher than the 35.4 percent change of the total population.

Table 1

Year

19601970

. Population and Labor Force in 1960 and 1970

TotalPopulation

(1)

27,087,68536,684,486

Population10 Yearsand Over

(2)

17,873,06025,122,640

Population10 Years

and Over inLabor Force

(3)

8,536,00012,300,435

Activity Rates

Crude(3)-(l)

31.533.5

Refined(3) -K2)

47.849.0

RefinedDependency

Ratio(1-3)-(3)

•217198

These increases in the labor force have to beinterpreted in the light of varied dates when these twocensuses were taken. While the 1960 census was taken inFebruary, the latter was conducted in May, a summermonth when possibly a number of youngsters onvacation entered the labor force.

With the increase in the proportion of labor forcemembers in the Philippine population, the dependencyratio also declined. In 1960, every 100 workerssupported 217 dependents. The 'dependent' populationis composed of the very young and the old as well asnon-labor force members from ages 10 and above. Withincreased labor force participation in 1970, the burdendecreased to 198.

As a proportion of those 10 years old and above,those in the labor force made up nearly half of this

Zosa 97

sub-population in 1970 and slightly less in 1960 (about47.8 per cent). This change has to be studied relative tochanges occurring in the age-sex composition of thelabor force.

The Labor Force by Sex and Age

The male labor force numbered nearly 6.4 million in1960 and 8.4 million in 1970. Females in the labor forcecomprised a considerably smaller number with 2.2million in 1960 and over 3.9 million in the latter year(Table 2). Converted into labor force sex ratios, forevery 100 female workers in 1960 there were 291 maleworkers. The 1970 ratio dropped to 213, implying eitheran increase in female participation, a decrease amongmale workers or both patterns occurring simultaneously.

Actually, over two-thirds of the total male population10 and over in both years were members of the laborforce. However, the proportion declined in 1970 from71.1 per cent to 68.1 per cent. The reverse can be notedamong females.

Table 2. Male and Female Labor Force Participation

Sex andYear

Males19601970

Females19601970

TotalPopulation

13,662,86918,250,351

13,424,81618,434,135

Population10 +

8,931,18012,287,332

8,941,88012,835,308

Labor ForcePopulation

10 +

6,352,4208,370,760

2,183,5803,929,675

Activity Rates

Crude

46.545.9

16.321.3

Refined

71.168.1

24.430.6

98 LABOR FORCE

The graph on age-sex labor force participation ratesshows in detail this trend (Figure 1). Male rates by agegroup followed the universal pattern for both years.Participation rates start at low levels in the youngerages, increase rapidly in the 20s, reach their peak at ages30-49 with rates exceeding 90 per cent, and declineslowly in the subsequent ages. However, declines inparticipation rates occurred for almost all ages in 1970.The only exception is the first age group, an effect ofentry or increased participation of the young duringvacation time.

Unlike those for males, female participation rates donot follow a defined pattern. In 1960, the highest levels ofparticipation can be found among females 15-24 andaround 45 years of age while lower rates can be notedamong those aged 25-39. These initial findings suggest aclose relationship between marital and maternal statusand labor force participation in 1960. However, thepattern may have changed in 1970. As anticipated, thepattern of gradually increasing participation could benoted for those in the first age groups. However, thepeak ages of participation had shifted to the middle agegroups especially within and around the age group40-44. In addition to such shifts, increased participationoccurred in all age groups except among females 65 andover. While still being much lower than the rates formales, the pattern of female participation rates in 1970somewhat resembled the prevailing age pattern formales.

This difference in age-sex composition of the laborforce in the 1960-1970 period can be summarized asfollows: as expected, males comprised the majority inthe labor force although it appears that there isdecreasing male labor force participation. Female laborforce participation appears to have increased, mostnotably in the last census, although it was stillsignificantly much lower than the level for males.

Zosa 99

100-1

90-

80-

70-

¡iS 50-

0)Q.

40-

30-

20-

10-

Flgure 1. Atc-Spcdflc Labor Force PirUdpaUon Rates1960 and 1970

« ^ &\ ^ 9 \ -^ O* ^ O \ T f C T » ^ +

T T t ? r ? 7 ' ? T T "î " Í «

Age

Urban-Rural Labor ForceParticipation Rates in 1970

In 1970, both urban and rural areas manifestedage-sex participation patterns relatively similar to levelsprevailing for the country as a whole: low proportionswere economically active in the youngest and oldest ageswhile peak participation occurred within the late 30s andearly 40s (Figure 2).

1Due to differences in the definition of "urban" in 1960 and 1970 only the1970 figures are given.

100 LABOR FORCE

Compared to urban males, males in rural areasappeared to have higher rates of participation for almostall ages. The greatest differences occurred especiallyamong those in the youngest age group (10-19) andamong those 65 and over. The only exceptions wereurban males aged 40-44 with their participation rate of90 per cent registering the highest level of economicactivity among all groups in the male population.

100-,

9 0 -

8 0 -

70-

a>u

" - 60-

I5IB 5 0 -

s¿0)

Q-30-

20-

10-

HGURE 2 . Age -Specific Labor Force ParticipationRales of Urban and Rural Areas

1970

RURAL

MALES

URBAN

\ t ) RURALFEMALES

URBAN

à û à .sAge

Zosa 101

A divergent pattern occurred in each locale amongfemales. Economic participation of urban femalesbelonging to the broad age group, 15-54, notablyexceeded participation of rural women within the sameages. It appears that the urban milieu may offer more"plus" factors, making it easier for more women tojoin the labor force. In contrast, rural females whobelonged to extreme age groups tended to be moreeconomically active than their urban counterparts. Thiswas noted even for males. The very young and theelderly, regardless of sex considerations, may findeconomic participation in the rural communities easierthan in an urban context.

Employment Status in 1960 and 1970

Of the total 8,536,000 labor force members in 1960,7,944,450 were estimated as either employed for wagesor salaries, working for profits or commissions, orparticipating as unpaid family workers. The numbercategorized as employed rose to 11,358,326 in 1970,representing an increase of about 43.0 per cent (Table3). Viewed as proportions of the labor force, theemployed comprised 93.1 per cent in 1960 and 92.3 percent in 1970, signifying a decrease in shares despite theincrease in actual numbers.

The employed in the male labor force numberedalmost 6,000,000 in 1960 and 10 years later, 7,893,260.The increment amounted to nearly 2,000,000, althoughthe number of employed males grew by 31.8 per cent.The percentage increase in the number of employedfemales was much more substantial. From 1,954,320employed females in the earlier year, the number swelledto 3,465,066 in 1970. While the increment amounted to1,510,746, the implied increase in the number employedwas 77.3 per cent, a growth much larger than that formales.

Despite the considerable increase in the number

102 LABOR FORCE

employed among females, the female employment ratedeclined slightly from 89.5 per cent in 1960 to 88.2 percent in the latter census year. A comparison with ratesfor males reveals that female employment rates werealways lower than those for males, and, unlike those forfemales, male employment rates did not change acrossthe years.

Table 3. The Labor Force 10 YearsUnemployed, 1960-1970

Sex andEmnlovment

Status

BOTH SEXESEmployedUnemployed

MALESEmployedUnemployed

FEMALESEmployedUnemployed

Sex andEmployment

Status

BOTH SEXESEmployedUnemployed

MALESEmployedUnemployed

FEMALESEmployedUnemployed

Old and Over Who Were Employed and

Labor Force (N)

1960

8,536,0007,944,456

591,5506,352,4205,990,130

362,2902,183,5801,954,320

229,260

Labor F

1960

93.16.9

94.35.7

89.510.5

1970

12,300,43511,358,326

942,1098,370,7607,893,260

477,5003,929,6753,465,066

464,609

irce (Vo)

1970

92.37.7

94.35.7

88.211.8

DifferenceBetween

1960 & 1970

3,764,4353,413,876

350,5592,018,3401,903,130

115,2101,746,0951,510,746

235,349

Difference

1960 & 1970

-.8+ .8

.0

.0

-1.31.3

Per CentIncrease

44.143.059:331.831.831.880.077.3

102.7

Per centIncrease

-86.911.6

.0

.0

12.412.4

The remaining portion of the labor force is made upof the unemployed. From 1960 to the summer of 1970,the unemployed rose by over 350,559, a numericalgrowth relatively higher than the growth among thoseemployed. This can be noted as a phenomenon thataffects females more acutely. Females who wereunemployed as of 1970 were 102.7 per cent more than

Zosa 103

those unemployed in 1960, a stark contrast to a figureof 31.8 per cent for males. Further compounding theproblem is the relatively higher unemployment rate forfemales. Male unemployment rates in 1960 and 1970did not exceed six per cent and appeared to have beenrelatively unchanged across the years. Those for femalesexceeded 10 per cent, with the 1970 rates surpassingthe 1960 level by about 12.4 per cent.

The problem of unemployment in 1970 can be betterobserved if one looks at how it affects definite groups inthe population. The rural and urban labor forcedisplayed equal rates of unemployment although thenotably high rates among females persist in both areas.On the whole, rural males had the lowest level ofunemployment, 5.3 per cent, compared to urban malesor to females of both sectors. However, it appears thatfemale labor force members are disadvantaged in therural areas; the over-all rate of unemployment is 13.3 percent (Figure 3).

Other disadvantaged groups are the young and theelderly, although sex-areal differentials and time modi-fied observations. The young displayed the highest ratesof unemployment for each sex and locale. This can beexpected considering the particular period that the 1970census was taken. Among those aged 10-24, ruralfemales had the highest rate (16.7 per cent) while urbanmales and females had slightly lower levels.

Trend in the Industrial Structure

About two-thirds of the 7,944,450 employed workersin 1960 belong to the agricultural sector. A shift towardnon-agricultural activities appears to have occurred, andin 1970 the proportion of workers in agriculture declinedto slightly over one-half of the total employed (Table 4).

104 LABOR FORCE

SSS

3 J? »i H * Mi« 3 a f-i t-; •«•

•fí.3

= 3 * So o •* »

S S "> Sf

=3 s # a? P3 ^ q S5 5 * 2

l a

•o + *5 S «

a •» ^ S3

£ 2 2 £

1 - 55 •*

5 á

<s m a

I s S |S s a S

!§ < 3 * SS M - =

Zosa 105

However, it should be noted that agriculture persists asthe major industry of most workers even as late as 1970.Table 4. Trends in Industry of the Employed Labor Force, Philippines, 1960-1970

Industry

Total

1. Agriculture, Hunting,Forestry & Fishing

2. Mining & Quarrying3. Manufacturing4. Electricity, gas, water,

& sanitary services5. Construction6. Commerce7. Transportation, Communication

& Storage8. Services9. Industries not adequately

described

(1) Agriculture(2-8) Non-Agriculture

Number

1960

7,944,450

5,162,06023,610

837,710

12,770177,030505,690

201,210911,050

113,320

5,162,0602,669,070

1970

11,358,326

6,099,86651,203

1,353,878

32,907438,242838,461

497,8741,861,667

184,228

6,099,8665,074,232

Per Cent

1960

100.0

65.00.3

10.5

0.22.26.4

2.511.5

1.4

65.033.6

1970

100.0

53.70.4

11.9

0.33.97.4

4.416.4

1.6

53.744.7

Per CentChange

—

-17.450.013.1

81.273.115.9

73.142.9

14.0

-17.433.0

For both years, two sectors—services and manufacturing-ranked as the country's predominant industries next toagriculture. Service industries, with their generallymarginal character and loosely structured entry require-ments, registered the highest increase in proportionemployed among the three major industries of thePhilippines.

The slowest growth in employment occurred in themanufacturing sector. Notwithstanding the pace, thetotal number of manufacturing workers reached 1,353,878 in 1970. The change in the commercial industry, thefourth largest sector, resembled the change in manufac-turing. On the other hand, the remaining industriesemployed lower proportions of workers across the years,but registered substantial increases during the decade.

Taking males and females separately, the largestgroup of workers employed in specific industries in the1960-70 period were found in agriculture, although thetrend of decline in agricultural employment held true for

106 LABOR FORCE

each sex (see Tables 5 and 6). Among males, only thissector registered negative change in relative proportionto total employment. The proportions in the largerindustries like the commercial, manufacturing andservice sectors appeared to have increased although theseincreases could not match the more ample increases inemployment in the smaller sectors like transportationand communication.

Table 5. Trends in Industry Groups1960-1970

Industry

Total1. Agriculture, hunting,

Forestry & fishing2. Mining & quarrying3. Manufacturing4: Electricity, gas, water

& sanitary services5. Construction6. Commerce7. Transportation, communication

& storage8. Services9. Industries not adequately

describedU) Agriculture(2-8) Non-agriculture

of the Employed Male Labor Force,

Number

1960

5,990,130

4,396,96022,630

385,810

11,870174,980263,150

197,250445,070

92,4104-,396,96P1,500,760

1970

7,893,260

4,929,51048,599

620,799

31,569435,010379,659

487,064823,497

137,5534,929,5102,826,197

Per

1960

100.0

73.40.46.4

0.22.94.4

3.37.4

1.573.425.5

Cent

1970

100.0

62.40.67.9

0.45.54.8

6.210.4

1.762.435.8

Per CentChange

-14.963.222.0

95.288.79.6

87.540.4

13.0-14.943.0

Aside from decreased agricultural employment theproportion of females in manufacturing had also gonedown. Among the industries that employed relativelylarge proportions of females, only the service andcommercial sectors increased. Even these increasesappeared to be moderate, if compared to those formales.

The more striking difference in industrial employmentbetween males and females can be observed if industrieswould be broadly grouped into two: agricultural andnon-agricultural (see lower portion of Tables 5 and 6).Females were predominantly non-agricultural workers;

Zosa 107

the proportions for 1960 and 1970 were 59.8 and 64.9per cent, respectively. Males were mainly agriculturalworkers with 73.4 and 62.4 per cent noted for therespective years under discussion. Despite such disparities,the decline in agricultural employment among males wasslightly higher compared to that for females. Corre-spondingly, male employment in non-agricultural workhas increased more substantially.

Table 6. Trends in Industry Group1960-1970

Industry

Total1. Agriculture, hunting,

Forestry & fishing,2. Mining & quarrying3. Manufacturing4. Electricity, gas, water

& sanitary services5. Construction6. Commerce7. Transportation, communication

& storage8. Services9. Industries not adequately

described(1) Agriculture(2-8) Non-agriculture

s of the Employed Female

Number

1960

1,954,320

765,100980

451,900

9002,050

242,540

3,960465,980

20,910765,100

1,168,310

1970

3,465,066

1,170,3562,604

733,079

1,3383,232

458,802

10,8101,038,170

46,6751,170,3562,248,035

Per

1960

100.0

39.20.0

23.1

0.10.1

12.4

0.223.8

1.139.259.8

Labor

Cent

1970

100.0

33.80.1

21.2

0.00.1

13.2

0.330.0

1.433.864.9

Force,

Per CentChange"

-13.760.0-8.5

-20.018.26.7

50.025.7

26.2-13.7

8.5

a Figures were taken from unrounded values for 1960 and 1970.

Trends in Occupational Structure

Accompanying the shifts in industrial structure aresimilar changes occurring in the specific types ofactivities done by workers (Table 7). Farmers, com-prising the largest segment of workers for both years,decreased from 65.6 to 53.0 per cent of the totalemployed for both years.

Among all non-farm workers, the largest proportionemployed in the 1960-1970 period were craftsmen,

108 LABOR FORCE

service and sales workers. However, these groups didnot increase considerably. Of all blue-collar workers,only transportation and communication workers attainedlarge increases in employment.

The entire blue-collar group expanded by 35.6 percent. This figure was lower compared to the 44.3 percent growth among white-collar workers brought aboutby positive changes for each constituent major occupa-tional category, more significantly among professionals.

Table 7. Trends in Occupation of the Employed Labor Force, Philippines,1960-1970

Occupation

Total1. Professional, technical and

related Workers2 Administrative, executive and

managerial workers3. Clerical workers4. Sales workers5. Farmers, fishermen, hunters,

loggers, & related workers6. Miners, quarrymen, and

related workes7 Workers in transport & comm.8. Craftsmen, production, process

workers, & laborers, NEC9. Service, sports & related'

workers10. Stevedores & related freight

handlers & laborers, NEC11. Occupation unidentifiable,

members of the Armed Forces12. Not stated(1-4) White-collar(6-8,10) Blue-collar(9) Service(5) Farm

Number

I960

7,944,450

233,390

48,630179,270486,080

5,214,160

16,620177,560

869,770

485,640

181,520

51,810

947,3701,245,470

485,6405,214,160

1970

11,358,326

648,469

137,714369,493774,962

6,022,386

32,612500,333

1,639,209

860,407

243,365

65,15564,221

1,930,6382,415,519

860,4076,022,386

Per Cent

1960

100.0

2.9

0.62.36.1

65.6

0.22.2

11.0

6.1

2.3

0.6-

11.915.76.1

65.6

1970

100.0

5.7

1.23.26.8

53.0

0.34.4

14.4

7.6

2.1

0.60.6

17.021.37.6

53.0

Per CentChange

—

94.2

100.043.811.4

-19.2

38.196.4

31.8

24.1

-6.1

-12.3-

44.335.624.1

-19.2

The results on occupational structure by sex agreewith the above findings on industrial structure. Themajority of males held agricultural occupations acrossthe years, although the proportion also went down from74.2 per cent in 1960 to 61.6 per cent in 1970. Despitesuch reductions, the number of male farmers were stillclose to five million in 1970.

Zosa 109

The proportions of males employed in all non-agricul-tural occupations increased positively. Large increasesoccured in occupations employing smaller proportionsof males (as in the professional administrative group) aswell as those in the larger group of craftsmen.

Viewed in terms of occupational classes of workers,most non-agricultural male workers were in the blue-collar category which increased by 61.2 per cent andswelled to 1,698,884 in 1970. Another noteworthyaspect is the slow expansion registered in the whitecollar segment; the rate was slower compared to those inthe blue-collar and service categories.

The changes occurring in the types of activitiesperformed by employed females resembled those for

Table 8. Occupations of Employed Males, 1960-1970

Occupation

Total1. Professionals, technical and

related workers2. Proprietors, managers,

administrators & officials3. Clerical office & related workers4. Salesmen & related workers5. Farmers, farm laborers, fisherman,

hunters, lumberman & relatedworkers

6. Workers in minequarry & relatedoccupations

7. Workers in operating transportoccupations

8. Craftsmen, factory operations& workers in related occupations

9. Manual workers & laborers, NEC10. Service & related workers11. Occupation not reported

(occupation unidentifiedmembers of AFP)

12. Not stated(1-4) White-collar(6-9) Blue-collar(5) Farmers(10) Services

Number

1960

5,990,130

114,140

41,600138,070239,760

4,444,500

16,270

174,060

435,320173,890164,460

48,060—

533,570799,540

4,444,500164,460

1970

7,893,260

283,124

98,658231,259334,416

4,859,572

32,185

492,744

942,329231,626294,397

58,47534,475

947,4571,698,8844,859,572

294,397

Per

1960

100.0

1.9

.72.34.0

74.2

.3

2.9

7.32.92.8

.8—

8.913.474.2

2.8

Cent

1970

100.0

3.6

1.22.94.2

61.6

.4

6.2

11.92.93.7

.7.4

12.021.561.63.7

Per CentChange

88.0

81.227.46.0

-17.0

51.8

114.4

64.21.0

35.6

-7.5—

34.861.2

-17.035.6

HO LABOR FORCE

males, first, in the decline of the group of farmers andrelated workers. But it should be pointed out that thisparticular group employed the largest number of femaleworkers in a single category: 769,660 in 1960 comparedto 1,162,814 in 1970. Second, the proportion inwhite-collar occupations increased in almost the samedegree as did those for males. This was the only broadgroup that registered an increase; the proportions in allother categories declined, although not as considerablyas did the farmer category.

Table 9. Occupations of Employed Females, 1960-1970

Occupation

Total1. Professional, technical and

related workers2. Proprietors, managers,

administrators & officials3. Clerical office & related workers4. Salesman & related workers5. Farmers, farm laborers,

Fishermen, hunters, .lumberman &related occupations

6. Workers in minequarry &related occupations

7. Workers in operating transportoccupations

8. Craftsmen, factory operations& workers in related occupations

9. Manual workers & laborers, NEC10. Service & related workers11. Occupation not reported

(occupation unidentifiedmembers of AFP)

12. Not stated(1-4) White collar(6-9) Blue-collar(5) Farmers(10) Services

Numbers

1960

1,954,320

119,250

7,03041,200

246,320

769,660

350

3,500

434,4507,630

321,180

3,750—

413,800445.530769,660321,180

1970

3,465,066

365,345

39,056138,234440,546

1,162,814

427

7,589

696,88011,739

566,010

6,68029,746

983,181716,635

1,162,814566,010

Per Cent

1960

100.0

6.1

.42.1

12.6

39.4

.0

.2

22.2.4

16.4

.2—

21.222.839.416.4

1970

100.0

10.5

1.14.0

12.7

33.6

.0

.2

20.1.3

16.2

.2

.928.420.733.616.3

Per CentChange

72.8

213.989.1

.9

-14.8

-50.0

22.2

-9.5-12.8

-.6

.0—

34.0-9.4

-14.8-.6

Zosa 111

Trends in the Status of Workers

The status of workers in the various economicactivities indicate the extent of organization involved inthe pursuance of these activities. The presence of wageand salary workers imply the existence of dennedrecruitment and termination arrangements and therelative regularity of income throughout a period. In1960, less than 30 per cent of all employed workers

Table 10. Trends in Ctai of Workers of the Employed Labor Force,Philippines, 1960-1970

Oaçç of WorkerW Ä » Ul TT Ulftvl

Total

Wage and salary worker

Private employeeGovernment employee

Own-account workers

Self-employedEmployer

Unpaid family worker

Not reported

Male

Wage and salary worker

Private employeeeGovernment employee

Own-account workersEmployer


Not reported

Female

Wage and salary workers

Private employeeGovernment employee

Own-account workers

Self-employedEmployer


Not reported

Number

1960

7,944,450

1,914,730407,560

3,610,81043,590

1,959,690

8,070

5,990,130

1,346,380293,670

3,055,50033,930

1,254,660

5,990

1,954,320

568,350113,890

555,3109,660

705,030

2,080

1970

11,358,326

3,895,364822,038

4,200,867154,699

2,241,337

44,021

7,893,260

2,695,461486,638

3,366,275103,562

1,220,190

21,134

3,465,066

1,199,903335,400

834,59251,137

1,021,147

22,887

Per Cent

1960

100.0

24.15.1

45.40.6

24.7

0.1

100.0

22.54.9

51.00.6

21.0

0.1

100.0

29.15.8

28.40.5

36.1

0.1

1970

100.0

34.37.2

37.01.4

19.7

.4

100.0

34.26.2

42.61.3

15.5

0.3

100.0

34.69.7

24.11.5

29.5

0.7

Per CentChange

42.341.1

-18.6147.3

-20.0

290.0

—

51.925.7

-16.4129.8

-26.2

170.0

—

19.166.0

-15.2202.0

-18.3

500.0

112 LABOR FORCE

belonged to this category with the private sectorapparently the main employer of such workers (24.1 percent). Wage and salary workers increased markedly tomake up 41.5 per cent of total workers in 1970. Growthin proportional employment was parallel in both privateand government institutions (Table 10).

Those working on their own account comprised thelargest group in 1960 (46.0 per cent). The majority weremainly working without employing other persons. In1970, the proportion of own-account workers lessenedto about 38.3 per cent of the total with the declineoccurring only among the non-employing self-employedwhile the number and proportion of employers morethan doubled.

Unpaid family workers belong to loosely definedorganizations with home or clan arrangements dictatingthe structure of such activities. As of 1960, one out ofevery four workers in the country were unpaid familyworkers. These workers actually constitute a decliningminority: one out of five workers belonged to the samecategory in 1970.

The status of male and female workers varied. Femaleworkers in 1960 were concentrated in the two extremestatus groups; over two-thirds were either wage andsalary or unpaid workers with the latter comprising thelarger group. About ten years later, female wage andsalary workers swelled to 44.3 per cent while those inthe latter group diminished to 29.5 per cent. The bulkof employed males for both years could be found asworking on their own account (51.6 per cent and 43.4per cent in 1960 and 1970, respectively). This group,however, contracted in size due to a decrease in theproportion self-employed without workers under theirpay. A similar pattern could also be noted for femalesalthough the proportion of own account workers amongemployed females for the two successive periodscomprised only 28.9 and 25.5 per cent, respectively.

Zosa 113

Summary

This chapter's examination)of the country's populationreveals that one out of every three persons in thePhilippines is a member of the labor force. However,being a labor force member does not warrant absorption;open unemployment across the 1960-70 period appearedto have increased slightly, although the figures involvedare affected by seasonal changes. Moreover, mostFilipino workers are still in the traditional sectoralthough a shift toward non-agricultural activitiesappears to have occurred.

REFERENCES

Philippines. Bureau of the Census and Statistics.Census of Population and Agriculture, 1948. Manila:Bureau of Printing, 1954.

. Census of the Philippines,1960: Population and Housing. Including unpublisheddata. Manila: 1963-1965.

Statistical Survey of House-holds Bulletin. Manila: 1956-1973.

Philippines. Commission of the Census. Census of thePhilippines, 1939. Manila: Bureau of Printing,1940-1941.

Philippines. National Census and Statistics Office.Census of Population and Housing, 1970. Manila,1974.

. National Sample Survey ofHouseholds Bulletin (formerly the BCS Survey ofHouseholds Bulletin). Manila, 1974-

POPULATION POLICYAND FAMILY PLANNING

MERCEDES B. CONCEPCIÓN

History of Population Concern

ALTHOUGH a United Nations-commissioned studyof manpower growth in the Philippines in i 957indicated a much higher rate of population increase thanthat evident from the 1948 population census, a resultwhich was later confirmed by the 1960 enumerationresults, nothing much was done until late 1962 when apopulation and development mission visited Manilaunder the auspices of the Ford Foundation. The missionhad as one of its objectives the establishment of nationalinstitutes to study population in all its aspects.Negotiations between the University of the Philippinesand the Ford Foundation ultimately led to the establish-ment in 1964 of a Population Institute at the University(UPPI) with initial support from the Ford Foundation.The Institute began to train demographers, initiated aresearch program on population matters significant forplanning and administrative purposes and served as afocal point for data dealing with population.

In 1965, during the first Conference on Populationwhich took place under the joint auspices of theUniversity of the Philippines Population Institute(UPPI) and the National Science Development Board(NSDB), a study made by Dr. Frank W. Lorimer of theUPPI indicated that maintaining the current fertility rate

115

116 POPULA TION POLICY & FAMIL Y PLANNING

till the end of the century would result in a Filipinopopulation of some 111 million persons. It was not tillOctober 1968, however, that the Philippine governmentset up a Project Office on Maternal and Child Health inthe Department of Health with overall responsibility foradministering a population planning program.

Although family planning had been quietly promotedby Protestant missionaries since the 1920s, it was only in1965 that two family planning associations wereorganized: the Planned Parenthood Movement of thePhilippines and the Family Planning Association of thePhilippines. These two associations merged to becomethe Family Planning Organization of the Philippines in1969. Meanwhile, the Manila City Health Department,with financial assistance from the Population Council,introduced family planning services in seven healthcenters throughout the city. These clinics, namedpre-pregnancy clinics, steadily grew in number until all40 health centers in Manila were involved.

While the private sector pioneered in the familyplanning movement, the government's commitmentexpressed through Executive Order Nos. 171 (February,1969) and 233 (May, 1970) accelerated the expansionand growth of the movement. The first Executive Orderestablished a Commission on Population to undertakestudies of the Philippine population in all its aspects andto formulate policy and program recommendations onpopulation as it relates to economic and socialdevelopment. The group submitted its recommendationsin September 1969 and President Marcos approved theCommission's recommended statement on populationpolicy and program in December 1969. The secondExecutive Order empowered the Population Commissionto coordinate and direct the national populationprogram as an integral part of the national developmentstrategy. An Executive Director was appointed in June1970 with responsibility for program operation.

Concepción 117

The Population Act (Republic Act No. 6365),establishing a national policy on population was signedinto law on 15 August 1971. The Philippine Congressdeclared "that for the purpose of furthering nationaldevelopment, increasing the share of each Filipino in thefruits of economic progress and meeting the grave socialand economic challenge of a high rate of populationgrowth, a national program of family planning whichrespects the religious beliefs of the individuals involvedshall be undertaken."

With the proclamation of martial law in September1972, Republic Act No. 6365 was revised throughPresidential Decree No. 79 (December 1972) whichexplicitly involved public and private sectors in thenational family planning program. The role of theCommission was also expanded by authorizing it todistribute contraceptives through commercial channelsand paramedic personnel. Presidential Decree Nos. 166(March 1973) and 803 (September 1975) recognized theprivate sector's role in the formulation and implementa-tion of population policy by granting them representa-tion in the Commission's Board of Commissioners.

Since the promulgation of the Population Act of 1971and its subsequent amendments, the following measureshave been adopted:

• Family planning became an important part of theFour-Year Development Plan.

• The government's share in the family planningbudget rose from zero in FY 71 to 61 per cent in F Y 76.

• More government agencies became involved in thefamily planning program.

• A population education program was initiated atthe elementary and secondary school levels.

• Courses in family planning and population dyna-mics were integrated in the curricula of all schools ofmedicine, nursing, midwifery, allied medical professions,and social work.


• Tax exemptions for dependents were limited to onlyfour dependents.

• Maternity leave benefits were reduced to the firstfour deliveries only.

• Establishments required by law to maintain a clinicor infirmary were enjoined to provide free familyplanning services to their employees.

• Importation of contraceptives was legalized andsubsequently, distribution of contraceptives was allowednot only at duly licensed drugstores and pharmacies butin all other commercial channels of distribution.

• All collective bargaining agreements were requiredto contain a provision for family planning services to allworkers covered by such agreements before these couldbe certified.

• Modern surgical techniques of contraception weredeemed acceptable provided these methods did notinvolve abortion.

The Philippine Family Planning Program

The national family planning program operates froma broad and multi-sectoral base. It has identified fourmajor areas of activity: (a) delivery of family planningservices through clinics situated all over the country;(b) training of all types and levels of personnel in theprogram; (c) information, education and communica-tion; and (d) research and evaluation.

The original goal in F Y 1970-71 was to reduce theintercensal population growth rate from 3.01 per cent inthe 1970s to 2.47 per cent in FY 1977 by the phasedinvolvement of family planning clinics and by therecruitment of an average of 50,000 acceptors monthly.The program is voluntary and non-coercive, featuring awide selection of contraceptive methods.

Concepción 119

The primary role of the Commission on Population isthat of central coordinator, orchestrating the develop-ment and administration of individual programs. As thepolicy-making, planning and funding agency of thegovernment for population matters, it refrains fromdirect implementation of projects.

In fulfilling its role, the Commission follows astrategy of "integration" and "multi-agency participa-tion." Aware that the population problem cannot beisolated from other problems of development, it hasintegrated family planning into existing programs inhealth, education, social welfare and community deve-lopment. To make full use of existing resources, it hasdrawn a good number of public and private agenciesinto its program.

In all its activities, the Commission recognizes theright of every couple to choose their own method offamily planning, in accordance with their moral convic-tions and religious beliefs.

Although organized family planning services had beenprovided by various agencies since 1964, it was only inmid-1970 that a nationwide family planning progrämwas started. From then on, the expansion of theprogram has been impressive as can be seen from Table 1.At the end of fiscal year 1970 there were only 248clinics mostly concentrated in large cities; now there are2,719 clinics spread all over the country.

As a result of clinic expansion, the annual number ofnew acceptors has grown from the initial 56,000J in FY1970 to 546,300 in FY 1975, adjusting for over-repor-ting and transferees. Correspondingly, adjusted cumula-tive acceptors increased from 56,000 in FY 1970 tó 2.4million at the end of FY 1975. These figures togetherwith the unadjusted number of acceptors are shown inTable 1. During FY 1975 there were some 728,400reported new acceptors; of these, however, 30 per cent1 Covers the period January to June 1970 only.


were estimated to be cases of over-reporting andtransferees. The adjusted number of acceptors recruitedfor FY 1975, therefore, was much less than the target of889,400 for that year. Assuming the adjusted number tobe correct and allowing for an annual mortality and

Table 1.

rcnofl

(1)

19701971197219731974197519761977

Eligible Population, Number of Acceptors and Users, 1970-1977

EligiblePopulation1*

(00 s)

(2)

4,339.3•4,471.64,640.64,805.34,976.55,154.35,380.75,614.3

Actual Numberof New Acceptors

(3)

72.2298.5536.1701.3802.4728.4

——

Adjusted No. ofAcceptors <•

(000 s)

(4)

56.1237.0428.4552.6619.5546.3

—

Target No.of

Acceptors6

(000 s)(5)

_

345.0576.0665.3804.7889.4

1224.0816.0

Adjusted TargetNo. of

Acceptors *

(6)

_

——

439.1515.0551.4911.2607.5

No. ofContinuing

Users*(000 s)

(7)

47.6226.9505.4786.9

1013.41122.31259.21316.5

a1970 : covering the period January—June1971-1975: covering the Fiscal Year (July-June) period1976 : covering 1 July 1975 to 31 December 19761977 : covering the calendar year (January-December) period.

Currently married women aged 15-44. The proportions married (Smith,1974) Projected Median Series were applied to the projected populationNCSO Median Series (Monograph No. 2).

CData taken from POPCOM Report. 1976 and 1977 were based on theassumption of 68,000/month turn-out. June 1975 method mix wasassumed to prevail until 1977.

"^Adjusted for over-reporting and transferees (rates from NAS 1974) aswell as for 4 per cent mortality and sterility.

e1971 to 1975 figures were obtained from the "Four Year DevelopmentPlan, FY 1974" prepared by NEDA. 1976 and 1977 figures were based onassumed 68,000 monthly turn-out of new acceptors and June 1975method mix to prevail until 1977.

g

Adjusted for over-reporting and transferees (rates from NAS 1974).

UPPI estimates of prevalence were utilized. First and All MethodContinuation rates were applied to adjusted number of acceptors. Forperiod subsequent to 1972, continuation rates for the year were applied.

Concepción 121

sterility rate of four per cent, the number of cumulativeusers at the end of FY 1975 would appear to be in theorder of 1,122,300. This is around 21 per cent of alleligible women, defined as all married women betweenthe ages 15-44 years.

The degree of government concern over populationgrowth is indicated by the amount of funds devoted tofamily planning. Prior to 1971, population programshad no national budget. During the years 1972-1975, thegovernment allocation rose from P8.2 million to P60.8million. At the same time, these amounts wereaugmented by substantial additional funds from externalsources. Assistance from the U.S. Agency for Inter-national Development started in FY 1968 with funds forprivate organizations that were providing services to asmall but growing number of acceptors. Through 1975,AID inputs into the program have been estimated atover P200 million. Another contributor of growingimportance is the United Nations Fund for PopulationActivities which signed a five-year agreement with thePhilippines in 1972 for projects amounting to $5million. In the list of private donors may be cited theInternational Planned Parenthood Federation, the Path-finder Fund, the Family Planning International Assis-tance, the Population Council, and the Ford andRockefeller Foundations.

Family Planning Program Impact

The success of the program depends a lot on the typesof contraceptive methods used as well as the continua-tion and pregnancy rates. These rates appear in Table 2.It can be seen that two years following acceptance, 53per cent of the women who initially accepted the pillswere still using some form of contraception, although

122 POPULATION POLICY & FAMIL Y PLANNING

only 42 per cent remained with pills. As expected, theIUD had the highest continuation rates followed by thepills, rhythm, and other methods. It is encouraging tonote that in comparison with other family planningprograms in Asia, the first-method continuation rates ofthe IUD and pill acceptors in the Philippines appearfavorable.

While the pills are clinically superior to the IUD,under actual social conditions in the Philippines bothhave practically the same effectiveness. The reason isthat factors such as motivation, negligence, and forget-fulness affect the actual effectiveness of the pills. TheIÜD, on the other hand, once in use is very much lessaffected by these factors. It is clear from the same tablethat IUD and pills are the most effective methods with a24-month failure rate of about seven per cent. As can be

Table 2.

Method

Pills

IUD

Rhythm

Condom

Two Year First Method and All-Method Conllnand failure Rates, Philippines 1970-1972

Year ofAcceptance

197019711972

All Years197019711972

All Years197019711972

All Years197019711972

All Years

2-Year Continuation Rates

First Method

4237323565573358

(51)(38)(36)41——

(11)(15)

All Methods

53.043.740.843.778.168.567.870.3

—42.345.946.9

—_

24.729.9

nation Rates

2-Year Failure Rales

4.75.28.86.84.86.16.8*

28.435.927.830.5

——

15.015.0

All Methods

10.611.918.615.08.17.19.48.4

(28.4)36.1)27.931.3

—_

(29.3)(27.8)

Note: Figures within parentheses denote rates based on more than 10 butless than 50 cases.* Weighed data not available.

SOURCES: Philips, J.F. and Z.C. Zablan, "Trends in First Method Conti-nuation and Pregnancy Rates for the Philippine Program Overthe 1970-1972 Period," University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute Research Note No. 28, 1974, and, "Trends in All-Method Continuation and Pregnancy Rates for Women WhoAccepted Over the 1970-1972 Period, 1974, NAS," Universityof the Philippines Population Institute Research Note No. 30,1975.

Concepción 123

expected, the worst method is rhythm, with a 31 percent two-year failure rate.

Because of differential failure rates among contracep-tive methods, it should be obvious that the effectivenessof the family planning program in reducing births willldepend, among other things, on the method distributionof acceptors. As far as new acceptors are concerned,the method mix clearly favors the highly effective ones.It is unfortunate, however, (see Table 3) that over timethe trend in the mix has been going against the IUD andthat, until very recently, the proportion of new pillacceptors had also dropped. Furthermore, analysis ofmethod changes and reacceptance clearly indicates a netmovement toward less effective methods.

Findings from the 1968 and 1973 National Demo-graphic Surveys taken in conjunction with programstatistics revealed that the early years of the programaffected attitudes toward contraception and family size,knowledge about high quality methods and use ofcontraception, especially pills. However, none of theseeffects were large enough. The median number ofchildren in 1973 was still about four, nearly twice whatit should be to reduce population growth to the replace-ment level through purely voluntary means .Unconditionalapproval for contraception was held by only 60 per centof the married women of reproductive ages, althoughunconditional disapproval had declined markedly. NearlyTable 3. Trend in Contraceptive Method Mix: FY 1971-1975

(Adjusted Figures)

FY 1971FY 1972FY 1973FY 1974FY1975

Pills IUD Rhythm Comdom Others

Per Cent

59.964.060.657.757.8

25.519.016.313.69.6

8.86.86.15.45.3

2.98.1

15.019.720.5

2.92.12.03:66.8

SOURCE: Commission on Population.


three-fourths (72 per cent) of the married women ofreproductive age said that they had not yet tried anymethod of contraception, and less than one-fifth (18 percent) said they were using a method at the time of thesurvey. Only 10 per cent were using the most highlyeffective program methods (pills and IUD). The changesin prevalence and method mix were estimated to havereduced marital fertility by about five per cent, althoughthe decline in overall fertility was probably somewhatgreater.

The extent of the program's influence by 1973 wasbetter seen in the urban sectors where two-thirds tothree-fourths of respondents knew of a family planningclinic. The effect of program clinics on current practicevaried slightly across all places of residence.

A positive association existed between educationallevel and knowledge of family planning clinic. Spectacu-lar increases in knowledge were recorded for womenwith primary education as compared tc those wives whohad not gone to school. While no direct relationshipcould be traced between current use of a clinic methodand educational attainment, it was very evident thatcurrent use of a clinic method nearly doubled amongmarried women with college education when contrastedto unschooled wives. These findings argue for a changein program strategy to overcome increasing resistance tothe recruitment of new acceptors and to motivate thosecouples who are unwilling to practice family planning.

In June 1974, a survey of program acceptors for theyears 1970-72 showed that four factors hamperedprogram effectiveness: (1) acceptance levelled off par-ticularly for those clinics in operation for a long periodof time; (2) greater proportions of acceptors chose theless effective methods; (3) women who switched methodsselected methods less effective than the first method;and (4) continuation rates for the effective methods haddeclined.

Concepción 125

The study disclosed that women who accepted early inthe program were likely to be more highly motivated topractice family planning than women accepting after theprogram had been functioning for several years. Theperformance of any family planning program is afunction of the numbers of women who accept, and ofthe continuation and failure rates of the methodsadopted. Although numbers of acceptors increased, themean performance of clinics declined over time.Moreover, the proportionate distribution of the accep-tors enrolled in the program in the first quarters of FY1970 to 1975 indicated that increasing proportions ofwomen accepted condoms, while declining proportionsaccepted the IUD. Consequently, the decreasing protec-tion afforded acceptors was more serious than thereduction in absolute numbers of acceptors.

Available data from the 1973 National DemographicSurvey indicated a drop of 0.57 children or nine per centin the fertility level since 1958-62. When restricted tomarital births only, it was apparent that marital fertilitywas still rising as late as 1963-67. However, the trendwas reversed during 1968-72, when the rate declined by0.41 per cent from 1963-67 to 1968-72. Later studies(Cabigon, 1976) suggest that the decline in maritalfertility may have been caused by event displacementwhich would tend to show a drop when none actuallyoccurred. On the other hand, the reduction in completedfamily size disclosed by the data, may have beenexaggerated due to the same phenomenon of eventdisplacement.

When fertility rates pertaining to the period 1958-62through 1968-72 were contrasted, all age groups from 15years onward showed consistent declines for the nationas a whole. The largest declines (as much as 33 per centfor the 15-19 years old) were manifested by the twoyoungest age groups, 15-24 years. Turning to age-specificmarital fertility rates, a declining trend was evident only


for age groups above 25 years for the period 1963-67 to1968-72. Again, such a decline may have been producedby event displacement which is characteristically foundin those age groups. Turning to married women below25 years, their births reflected steady increases over the15-years interval—13 per cent for wives in their lateteens and four per cent for married women in their early20s. It could be speculated that these younger womenwere producing children early in their childbearing yearswith the intention of completing their family size wellbefore the onset of menopause. Being younger, thesewomen would be less subject to memory lapse andwould report their births correctly and without bias.

In general, the peak childbearing ages were 25-34years. Nearly half (49 per cent) of the average numberof children born to all women by the end of theirchildbearing period was contributed by these age groups.Although women married later, they begin producingchildren early in the marriage. Five out of every 11births during marriage occurred to girls 15-24 years old,thereby offsetting the influence of delayed marriage onmarital fertility.

Outlook for the Future

The combination of an organized family planningprogram and increasing social and economic develop-ment in the past five years have produced a significantnumber of contraceptive users and a drop in fertility.Despite the rise in continuing users and the perceiveddeclines in birth rate,, a further increase in population isalmost inevitable because: a) the fertility of the youngerwomen remains high; b) the number of women in theyounger ages of childbearing has been increasing; and c)attitudinal studies in 1974 indicate that more than half

Concepción 127

(54 per cent) of women are really more predisposedtoward larger family size than they expressed at firstchoice.

It is clear that the way to accelerating declines in birthrate is through: (1) further reduction of preferred familysize, (2) wider spacing of births, (3) later marriage, (4)effective communication on the more efficient contra-ceptive measures, and (5) greater involvement at all levelsof the administrative structure.

In an attempt to overcome these shortcomings, thefollowing activities have been initiated;

a. Barrio resupply points (BRP) have been establishedin a number of communities to bring the suppliescloser to the acceptors and thus lessen the drop-out rate owing to limited clinic outreach.

b. The Department of Education and Culture isactively involved in the promotion of populationeducation and has authorized all educationalinstitutions whose faculty members had receivedpopulation education training to offer a three-unit undergraduate course in population startingschool year 1975-1976.

c. A new program orientation was put into effect inseven provinces in July 1975. As a developmentphilosophy, the Total Integrated DevelopmentApproach involves two major areas of concern:1. Integration down to community level of all

Commission on Population-funded and coor-dinated population program-related services ; and

2. Participation by the implementing agencies andthe communities themselves in the planning,organization, management, funding and provisionof these services.

d. Feasibility studies on local manufacture of pillsand IUDs to pave the way for the eventual phaseout of commodity assistance from abroad.


e. Commercial distribution of condoms and later ofpills.

f. Several experimental studies—a combined app-roach involving food production, nutrition andfamily planning; a study on the value of chil-dren; incentive schemes of various kinds; ruraloutreach program; an institutional developmentprogram—are being carried out to accelerateprogram impact.

To what extent the crude birth rate in the Philippinescan be reduced significantly by these efforts is stillunknown. It is clear, however, that provision of servicesalone is insufficient to reduce the nation's still high rateof increase. The country has been tackling the task ofserving the highly motivated and ready-to-accept group.But what remains is the task of reducing the total familysize and of spacing births at longer intervals. The task isformidable but not impossible.

REFERENCE

Cabigon, Josefina V. (1976), The Validity of MeasuringPhilippine Fertility Change Through Birth HistoryAnalysis, Unpublished thesis, University of thePhilippines Population Institute.

POPULATIONPROJECTIONS

DIONISIA R. DE LA PAZ

THE CURRENT SITUATION in the Philippines has bothgovernment and private sectors engaged in socialand economic development efforts on a more massiveand pervasive scale than in the past. Connected with thisis an increasing demand for population projections forplanning purposes as well as for a clearer understandingof demographic phenomena and the changes that theyundergo. Various agencies are increasingly turning toprojections to be able to ascertain the social andeconomic implications of demographic changes. Infor-mation on the future trend of population size andage-sex distribution is directly useful in anticipatingrequirements for food, housing, transportation, healthservices, recreation, communication, and other consumergoods and services. Specialized projections indicate theregional distribution of the population, the number ofhouseholds and families, school population and the sizeand sex-age distribution of the labor force.

Some attempts had been made to project thePhilippine population before the 1970 census (UnitedNations, 1960; Lorimer, 1966; Bureau of the Census andStatistics, 1969). However, these projections are of littleuse in satisfying the demands of public and privateplanning agencies. More recently, the National Censusand Statistics Office (NCSO) prepared a series ofprojections based on the 1970 census of population

129

130 POPULATION PROJECTIONS-

(National Census and Statistics Office, 1975). Theprojections presented in this chapter were prepared bythe University of the Philippines Population Institute(TJPPI) also using the 1970 census figures. Althoughthese two latest projections followed the same methodo-logy, the component method, they differ in their fertilityand mortality assumptions. Furthermore, in the NCSOprojections, the medium series is the average of the highand low series, while in the UPPI projections, themedium series was generated based on a separateassumption.

Assumptions of Population Projections

Base Population. The base population used for thisset of population projections is the adjusted age and sexdistribution of the 1970 census population (NationalCensus and Statistics Office, 1975). These figures werethen brought forward to midyear, 1 July 1970, byapplying the exponential growth formula.

Mortality. Earlier, it was stated that mortalitystatistics in this country as obtained from the registrationsystem are grossly inadequate. Thus, age-sex-specificmortality rates required for population projectionscannot be computed from available mortality statistics.To meet this need, model life tables based on theexperiences of other countries were used.

Several investigators have made estimates of theaverage expectation of life at birth for different periods(Zablan, 1975). For the year 1970, the estimates rangedfrom 57.6 (Engracia, 1974) to 59.6 (Zablan, 1975).Adopting a level of 58 years for both sexes as areflection of the true mortality conditions obtaining thatyear, probabilities of surviving were computed using the"West" family of model life tables.

de la Paz 131

The pattern of improvement in life expectancy wasassumed to occur uniformly throughout the projectionperiod with quinquennial increments amounting to 1.9years or an annual increment of 0.38 year (Zablan,1975). Thus, with an initial expectation of life at birthfor both sexes of 58 years in 1970, life expectancy isexpected to reach a level of 67.5 years by the end of thecentury. This assumption is based on the results of theanalysis made on the trends in mortality since 1918.

The chapter on Components of Growth drew attentionto the trend in average expectation of life at birth overthe period 1918-1970. The trend suggests a thresholdlevel of mortality has been reached at a level of 58 years sinceminimal improvements in life expectancy have beenobserved and can be expected in the near future(Zablan, 1975).

Fertility. In the absence of accurate birth statistics,estimates of fertility levels, trends and age patterns usingcensus and survey data, were used.

The National Demographic Survey of 1973 providesinformation on fertility levels and patterns by age fromdata collected in the form of pregnancy histories, whichrecords the date of birth, sex and type of terminationof each pregnancy in the order of occurrence. Theresulting age-specific fertility rates for the period1968-72 centering in the year 1970 were utilized forthe projections.

With respect to the future course of fertility, threealternative assumptions were made (Sous, 1975).

a. High series: In this assumption, the scheduleof age-specific fertility rates observed in 1970,resulting in a total fertility rate of 5.89, was as-sumed to remain constant throughout the projec-tion period.

b. Medium series: This series assumed a mode-rate decline in age-specific fertility rates, with the

132 POPULA TION PROJECTIONS

annual rates of decline following Leibenstein'sformulation as modified by Lorimer in 1965. Itwas further assumed that the decline in total fer-tility rate took effect during the middle of the firstquinquennial period, 1970-75, from a level of5.89 in 1970 to 5.44, indicating a decline of 0.45birth or eight per cent. The total fertility rate wasassumed to decline further to 5.00, 4.60, 4.23,3.90in the following quinquennial periods. By the turnof the century, the projected total fertility rate wasassumed to have declined to 3.59, implying anoverall decline of 39 per cent.

c. Low series: This series assumed an accelera-ted decline in fertility over the 30-year projectionperiod, starting from 1970, with a doubling of theassumed annual rates of decline in accordance withthe Leibenstein-Lorimer formulation. According tothis assumption, the total fertility rate observed in1970 would have declined to 4.96 by the middleof the first quinquennial and was assumed to dec-line further to 4.19 by the period 1975-1980, to3.56 by the third quinquennial period, to 3.03 and2.58 in the following two five-year periods, andfinally, to 2.21 by the end of the century.

Migration. It was assumed that net internationalmigration would remain negligible throughout theprojection period in view of the fact that the govern-ment has discouraged migration to and from thecountry.

Sex Ratio at Birth. From the birth registrationstatistics of 1970, the sex ratio at birth was estimated tobe 110 males per 100 females. However, this ratio isbelieved to be too high for the country. For projectionpurposes a sex ratio of 105 was utilized.

de la Paz

Projected Population by Age and Sex

133

Based on assumptions regarding the future course ofeach of the components of population change, namely,fertility, migration and mortality, and the estimatedmidyear population by age and sex as of 1970, thePhilippine population was projected to the year 2000 byfive-year intervals using the component method ofprojection. The results are presented in Table. 1.

Table 1. Projected Male and Female Population by Five-Year Age Groupand by Five-Year Intervals, 1970-2000 (000 s)

AgeGroup

Male0 - 45 - 910-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475 +

Female0 - 45 - 910-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475 +

BasePopulation

3,1622,8322,5601,9921,5341,1951,013

945736629504405313192151164

3,0772,7212,4932,1091,6331,2781,070

964757660516407304198142190

1975

High

3,6903,0712,8032,5311,9591,5031,168

986914703591462356258145166

3,5742,9972,6942,4442,0781,6041,2521,044

936731630484370263158183

Medium

3,4153,0712,8032,5311,9591,5031,168

986914703591462356258145166

3,3072,9972,6942,4442,0781,6041,2521,044

936731630484370263158183

Low

3,1263,0712,8032,5311,9591,5031,168

986914703591462356258145166

3,0272,9972,6942,4442,0781,6041,2521,044

936731630484370263158183

1980

High

4,5063,6003,0432,7742,4921,9231,4721,140

956877664544408296196164

4,3583,4962,9712,6532,4132,0451,5751,2251,018

907700593443322211194

Medium

3,8473,3323,0432,7742,4921,9231,4721,140

956877664544408296196164

3,7213,2352,9712,6532,4132,0451,5751,2251,018

907700593443322211194

Low

3,2553,0503,0432,7442,4921,9231,4721,140

9568776645444082961%164

3,1482,9612,9712,6532,4132,0451,5751,2261,018

907700593443322211194


Table 1. Projected Male and Female Population by Five-Year Intervals,1970-2000 (000's) (Continued)

AgeGroup

Male

0- 45- 9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475 +

Female0- 45- 9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475 +

1985

High

5,4164,4163,5723,0162,7382,4521,8891,4421,109

921831613484342227200

5,2334,2813,4712,9412,6242,3802,0131,5451,198

989872662545388261240

Medium

4,2743,7703,3053,0162,7382,4521,8891,4421,109

921831613484342227200

4,1303,6553,2122,9412,6242,3802,0131,5451,198

989872662545388261240

Low

3,3483,1903,0253,0162,7382,4521,8891,4421,109

921831613484342227200

3,2353,0922,9402,9412,6242,3802,0131,5451,198

989872662545388261240

1990

High

6,3635,3284,3863,5442,9802,6992,4141,8551,4071,072

877772549409265239

6,1415,1614,2573,4492,9152,5942,3481,9811,5151,167

954828612482318301

Medium

4,6224,2043,7453,2802,9802,6992,4141,8551,4071,072

877772549409265239

4,4604,0733,6343,1922,9152,5942,3481,9811,5151,167

954828612482318301

Low

3,3433,2943,1683,0022,9802,6992,4141,8551,4091,072

877772549409265239

3,2263,1913,0752,9212,9152,5942,3481,9811,5151,167

954828612482318301

Growth of the Total Population. The projectionsreveal the considerable growth of the Philippinepopulation even under the assumption of a rapidfertility decline. This can be explained by the fact thatunder favorable mortality conditions, more of theyounger members of the population would survive in fargreater numbers by the time they reach the childbearingages than ever before.

de la Paz 135

Table 1. Projected Male and Female Population by Five-year Age Groapand by Five-Year Intervals, 1970-2000 (000 s) (Continned)

AgeGroup

Male

0—45—9

10—1415—1920—2425—2930—3435-3940—4445—4950—5455—5960—6465—6970—7475 +

Female0- 45- 9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475 +

1995

High

7,3946,2825,2974,356? 5082,9442,6642,3771,8161,3661,025

819695468319286

7,1286,0775,1374,2353,4232,8882,5662,3171,9471,4801,130

909769545398375

Medium

4,8724,5634,1803,7203,2462,9442,6642,3771,8161,3661,025

819695468319286

4,6974,4144,0543,6163,1682,8882,5662,3171,9471,4801,130

909769545398375

Low

3,2133,3003,2753,1472,9712,9442,6642,3771,8161,3661,025

819695468319286

3,0973,1923,1763,0592,9002,8882,5662,3171,9471,4801,130

909769545398375

2000

High

8,6637,3256,2535,2684,3193,4722,9122,6282,3341,7691,311

962742597369348

8,3417,0776,0575,1154,2113,3982,8622,5382,2841,9081,4371,081

850690454476

Medium

5,0704,8264,5424,1573,6883,2132,9122,6282,3341,7691,311

962742597369348

4,8824,6634,3994,0373,5953,1452,8622,5382,2841,9081,4371,081

850690476476

Low

2,9843,1833,2853,2573,1202,9412,9122,6282,3341,7691,311

962742597369348

2,8733,0753,1823,1623,0422,8782,8622,5382,2841,9081,4371,081

850690476476

SOURCE: Paz, Dionisia R. delà, "Philippine Population Projections,1970-2000", Research Note No. 60, University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute, 1975.

Table 2 shows the projected population totals and percent increases according to the various assumptions.Under the high series, the projections indicate a neardoubling of the 1970 population by the year 1990. By1995, the population would have more than doubled,


representing an increase of 125 per cent since 1970. Bythe year 2,000, the projected population shows anincrease of 166 per cent over the previous three decades.The medium series of projections shows that thepopulation will nearly double by the year 1995,representing a 92 per cent increase over the base period.By the end of the 20th century, this assumptiongenerated a total population 114 per cent larger thanthat found in 1970. The low series manifested slowergrowth of the population. According to this assumption,the population is expected to grow by only 78 per centover the next three decades.

Table 2. Projected Total Population and Per Cent IncreasePhilippines, 1970-2000

Year

High1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Medium1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Low1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000

Projected Population

36,849,22942,747,28050,182,69059,313,45870,184,29082,942,73898,050,629

36,849,22942,205,78248,358,06355,272,42862,766,41870,634,32278,767,905

36,849,22941,636,29946,636,25551,756,60156,775,33661,434,87365,534,492

°/o Increase

—16366190

125166

1431507092

114

132640546778

SOURCE: Paz, Dionisia R. delà, "Population Projections: 1970-2000"Project Report, PREPF Phase I. University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute, 1975.

de la Paz 137

Concomitant with the increase in population size isthe increase in population density. A glance at Table 3shows that under the high series, from an average of ( 123persons per square kilometer in 1970, the populationdensity is expected to double by 1990 (234) and nearlytriple by the year 2000 (327). Assuming a moderatedecline in fertility, population density would more thandouble in the year 2000 with 262 inhabitants per squarekilometer. Under the low assumption, the resultantpopulation density would be 218.Table 3. Population Density as Estimated from the Various Population

Projections: Philippines, 1970-2000

Year

1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000

High

123142167198234276327

Medium

123141161181209235262

Low

123139155172189205218

SOURCE: Paz, Dionisia R. delà, "Population Projections: 1970-2000",Project Report, PREPF Phase I. University of the PhilippinesPopulation Institute, 1975.

Changes in the Age Structure. The proportion of thetotal population in broad age groups is shown in. Table4. According to the high series, the proportion of thetotal population under 15 years of age is expected todecline slightly from 47.5 per cent in 1970 to 44.6 percent in the year 2000. Under the assumption of amoderate decline in fertility, the proportion in this sameage group will drop by almost 10 points from 47.5 to36.0 at the end of the century. Under the lowassumption, the proportion of the population below 15by the year 2000 will be reduced to nearly half its levelin 1970.

The proportion of the population in the working ages,15-64 years, will remain constant at about 52 per centfrom 1970 to the end of the projection period, according


to the high series. Under the medium assumption, thisproportion will increase from 51.5 per cent in 1970 to60.3 per cent in the year 2000. Under the low series, theproportion of the population aged 15-64 will increase bynearly 16 percentage points, from 51.5 to 67.2.

Table 4. Structure of the Philippine Population (In Percentages)By Broad Age Groups, 1970-2000

Year

High1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Medium1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Low1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000

0-14

45.744.143.844.545.145.044.«

45.743.341.740.439.437.936.0

45.742.639.536.434.031.328.3

15-64

51.553.253.452.752.052.152.4

51.553.955.456.657.458.760.3

51.554.657.560.462.464.867.2

65+

2.82.72.82.82.92.93.0

2.82.82.93.03.23.43.7

2.82.83.03.23.63.94.5

Total

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0


The proportion of the population above 64 will followthe trend exhibited by the working age population. Theproportion of the aged population is expected to remainconstant at 2.8 per cent throughout the projectionperiod, as shown by the high series. The medium seriesshow a slight increase from 2.8 per cent in 1970 to 3.7

de la Paz 139

per cent in the year 2000. The low assumptionmanifested a rise of almost two percentage points, from2.8 per cent to 4.5 per cent at the turn of the century.

Dependency Burden. Linked with the expected changesin the age structure is a change in the dependency ratio.The dependency ratios computed from the variouspopulation projections are presented in Table 5. Thechild dependency ratio (the ratio of the number ofchildren below age 15 to the number of persons in theages 15-64) was 89 in 1970. This ratio is expected to

Table 5. Dependency Ratios According to Various Population Projections forthe Philippines, 1970-2000

Year

High1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Medium1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000Low1965-19701970-19751975-19801980-19851985-19901990-19951995-2000

ChildDependency

Ratio

89838284868685

89807571696460

89786960544842

AgedDependency

Ratio

5555666

5555666

5555667

TotalDependency

Ratio

94888789929291

94858076757066

94837465605449



decline slightly to 85 in the year 2000 according to thehigh series. Under the assumptions of moderate andrapid declines in fertility, the ratio will drop to 60 and42, respectively, by 2000 A.D. The aged dependencyratio (the ratio of the number of persons 65 years oldand over to the number of persons in the ages 15-64)show very little change over the 30-year period for allthree sets of projections. According to the highassumption, the total dependency ratio would mean oneworking Filipino supporting one other dependent. Ifthe medium assumption were to be realized, the totaldependency would be much lighter, with three workingFilipinos supporting two dependents. Under the lowseries, two persons in the working ages would supportonly one dependent.

de la Paz 141

REFERENCES

Demography Division. Bureau of the Census and Sta-tistics, "Population Projections of the Philippines,1960-1975": December 15, 1969. (mimeographed)

Engracia, Luisa T. Estimates of the Life Table Func-tions of the Philippines: 1970. Monograph No. 1,NCSO-NEDA: 1974.

Lorimer, Frank W. "Analysis and Projections of thePopulation of the Philippines" in the Proceedings ofthe First Conference on Population, 1965* the Popu-lation Institute, University of the Philippines Press:Quezon City, 1966, pp. 200-314.

Philippines. National Census and Statistic Office. Ageand Sex Population Projections for the Philippines byProvince: 1970-2000. Monograph No. 2, NCSO-NEDÀ: 1975.

Paz, Dionisia R. delà. "Population Projections: 1970-2000." Project Report, PREPF Phase I. University ofthe Philippines Population Institute, 1975.

Paz, Dionisia, R. delà. "Philippine Population Projec-tions, 1970-2000", Research Note No. 60, Universityof the Philippines Population Institute, 1975.

Solis, Helen C. "Fertility Assumptions for PhilippinePopulation Projections, 1970-2000," Research NoteNo. 55. University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute, 1975.

United Nations. Population Growth and Manpower inthe Philippines, Population Studies, No. 32, UnitedNations. New York:, 1960, pp. 6-10.

Zablan, Zelda C. "The Prospects of Mortality in theYear 2000: A First Attempt," Research Note No. 56,University of the Philippines Population Institute,1975.

142 POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Zablan, Zelda C , and Emmanuel Viriña. "A ThresholdLevel of Mortality: Some Evidences from PastTrends," Research Note Nö. 83, University of thePhilippines Population Institute, 1975.

Zablan, Zelda C. "The Evaluation of Existing Mor-tality Estimates: Philippines, 1902-1973," ResearchNote No. ,82. University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute, 1975.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMICIMPLICATIONS OF

POPULATION GROWTHERNESTO M. PERNIA

THE IMPLICATIONS of population growth are conceivablymany and complex. This chapter attempts to merelysketch out the broad implications with a view toproviding a perspective for policy. It seems logical tostart with the more obvious and proceed to theless perceptible implications.

Size, Density, and Structure

The preceding chapter on population projectionsrevealed the direct demographic effects that wouldemerge from three different regimes to populationgrowth. The variations are considerable and bearrecasting here. The three different streams of populationsize resulting from a continuation of the latest observa-ble trend (high), moderately diminishing (medium), andrapidly falling growth rate are as follows (in thousands):

Year

1975198019902000

High

42,74750,18370,18498,051

Medium

42,20648,35862,76678,770

Low

41,63646,63656,77565,534

143

144 IMPLICATIONS OF POPULATION GROWTH

The corresponding population densities per squarekilometer would be the following:

Year

1975198019902000

High

142167234327

Medium

141161209262

Low

139155189218

The third direct demographic consequence of popula-tion growth is on the age structure, which may beexpressed • in socio-economic terms by the dependencyburden (in per cent), to wit:

Year

1975198019902000

High

87.987.192.190.8

Medium

85.680.374.366.0

Low

83.073.960.148.9

All three demographic features (size, density, anddependency burden) manifest exponentially wideningdivergencies over time. This is because of the momen-tum inherent in the growth process (see Keyfitz, 1971).It is significant, for example, that the burden ofdependency would mount slightly if the growth rate ofthe 1960s predominates, but would be cut by nearly aquarter or over two-fifths if the growth rate slows downmoderately or dramatically. The rise in old-age depen-dency due to declining fertility would be minimal, thatis, aging would be no problem as yet by the end of thecentury.

Pernia 145

Distribution

The process of urbanization or rural-urban transfor-mation would also be affected by the rate of populationgrowth. Past trends reveal that this transformationproceeded more rapidly before the post-war accelerationof population growth (Pernia, 1976). This is becausesuch acceleration was much greater in the rural sectorthan in the urban sector, and because the heavierdependency burden stemming from high fertility in ruralareas tended to retard movement to urban areas.Additionally, to the extent that rapid population growthhampered economic development, rural-urban restruc-turing was also slowed down.

Assuming, nonetheless, that the pace of urbanizationwould pick up, we can estimate, for illustrativepurposes, the possible sizes of rural and urbanpopulation by 2000 A.D. Here, we split the broadurban category into the population living in big cities(100,000 + ) and those in smaller urban places. Theresults, based on the three population projection series,would be the following (in thousands):

Rural

19752000

High

27,70051,771

Small Urban

19752000

Big City

19752000

7,01113,923

8,03632,357

Medium

27,34941,591

6,91411,21.7

7,94325,962

Low

26,98034,602

6,8289,306

7,82821,626

Per cent(constant)

64.852.8

16.414.2

18.833.0

146 IMPLICA TIONS OF POPULA TION GROWTH

Thus, the prospect to be especially reckoned with is thephenomenon of citification. City population wouldgrow annually at 5.7 per cent under high populationgrowth, 4.8 per cent under medium, and 4.1 per centunder low growth. About one-half of the end-of-the-century city population would constitute the Manilamegalopolis even assuming a tapering of its growth.Yet, the growth of rural populations cannot be ignored.The estimates suggest that citification, urbanization, andrural development would be more manageable if fertilitydeclines. Although it is not shown with the foregoingestimates, it must be noted again that the decline inrural proportion and corresponding increases in urbanand city proportions can proceed faster, while theabsolute sizes would be smaller, under a regime of slowpopulation growth.

National IncomePerhaps, the most obvious economic consequence of

population growth is that on income per capita.Changing population growth trends would mean differ-1ent levels of income per capita. We can appreciate thesevariations by relating the three projected populationseries to the medium projections of real gross nationalproduct (at 1967 prices), which are based on thepost-war annual growth rate of 6.5 per cent (Barlis,1975). The prospective GNPs per capita (in pesos) wouldbe as follows:

Year1975198019902000

High

1,0131,1821,5872,132

Medium

1,0261,2271,7742,654

Low

1,0401,2721,9613,190

Thus, the high series would imply a real GNP per capitain 2000 A.D. of just over double the 1975 level. On theother hand, the medium series would mean a 160 per

Pernia 147

cent increase, and the low series a tripling of GNP percapita in 25 years. The income differential between thehigh and the low series would be some PI ,058 percapita, an amount bigger than the 1975 level; likewise,the differential between the high and medium would beabout half this amount. The implied annual growthrates of real income per capita are 3.0 per cent, 3.9 percent, and 4.6 per cent, respectively, for the high,medium, and low series.

As is well recognized, these are at best crudemeasures of economic well-being. However, it is notpossible to illustrate here the income distributionpictures that might be associated with different popula-tion futures. We can only suggest two things. First,since the first survey of family income in 1956, incomedistribution (as measured by Gini coefficient) does notseem to have improved; if any, it appears to haveworsened (Mangahas, 1975). And, second, to the degreethat the fertility of low-income groups is higher thanother groups, it seems logical to suppose that apersistence of high fertility would worsen rather thanimprove income inequity. Furthermore, populationgrowth tends to raise land values and rents while itdepresses wages. There are, of course, other more subtleeffects of demographic factors on income distribution,which are discussed lengthily elsewhere (see e.g.,Boulier, 1975; Mangahas, 1974).

At the micro level, growth in the size of the familywould, after a time lag of 10 to 15 years, lead to anincrease in the number of family workers arid, in turn,to an increase in family income. But it appears that thismarginal effect on income diminishes with the increasein number of family workers (Mangahas, 1974).Moreover, the time lag during which the additionalmember is a dependent must be reckoned with and theavailability of productive employment upon maturity isanother matter to consider. The attainment of real

148 IMPLICA TIONS OF POPULATION GROWTH

maturity may be a negative function of family size inthat child health and family size are inversely correlated(see,e.g., Corsa and Oakley, 1971).

Food, Housing and Employment

Poverty as measured conservatively by the foodthreshold has deteriorated markedly over the pastdecade (Abrera, 1975). The trend has been worse inrural areas than in urban areas. On the whole, thenumber of persons below the food threshold swelledfrom about 11.6 million in 1965 to 16.6 million in 1971.This means that the growth in number of poor peoplehas been much more rapid than the overall growth ofpopulation.

Again, we do not have sufficient basis for relating thefood problem to the population projections above. Butit seems foolhardy to remain sanguine about the futureif one thinks in terms of unrelenting population growth.A similar comment may be made concerning theproblems of housing and employment. A continuationof the recent trend would imply an increase in thenumber of families from 7.5 millions to 17.8 millions,and the number of households from 6.9 to 16.0 millionsover the next quarter century (Cabigon, 1975). At thesame time, the size of the work force would double tosome 30.0 millions if current participation rate isassumed to prevail and applied to the medium popula-tion projection (Domingo, 1975).

Government Expenditures

Population growth would have a bearing on thegovernment budget. The faster population expands, thegreater will be the strain on the government's fiscalcapacity for such public services as education, health,

Pernia 149

social welfare, national defense, maintenance of peaceand order. Budgetary problems would be more seriousstill in view of the growth of cities where public serviceswould be required to a greater extent. Conversely,declining fertility would enable the government not onlyto improve the quality of public services but also toallocate more public funds for infrastructures and othercapital investments that enhance the productive capacityof the economy. In short, rapid population growthentails a social cost to a country with limited capitalresources.

Bautista (1974) has developed a model for projectinggovernment expenditures on education and health undermoderate versus slow population growth assumptions.Annual and total savings in education (elementary andsecondary) and health expenditures due to reducedpopulation growth are estimated (Bautista, 1974:230) tobe as follows:

Year

1975198019902000

Total: 1971-2000

Savings(in million 1967 pesos)

592

1,1052,514

23,295

Note that the estimates assume decreasing enrollmentrates in government general secondary schools, increas-ing enrollment rates in government vocational secondaryschools, and rising government health expenditures percapita, to take into account recent policy directions. Thesavings are relatively small in the first few years becauseof the lagged effects of fertility reduction, but becomeincreasingly substantial over time. By the year 2000, theaggregate saving would be from 67 to 73 per cent of real

150 IMPLICA TÍOS S OF POPULA TION GRO WTH

gross national product in 1970. Bautista (1974:222)concludes that "these figures should be regarded asreflecting only the minimum quantitative effect ofpopulation growth on government expenditures sincethere are components of the public budget other thaneducation and health that are also population-depend-ent."

Trade and Aid

Other areas on which population growth impinges,indirectly perhaps but importantly nonetheless, areforeign trade and aid. It is logical to suppose that tradeand aid requirements would be greater the fasterpopulation expands, other things being equal. Chancesfor future financial independence would be slimmer thanif fertility were declining (see Pearson, 1969). Theextent, nature, and direction of trade and aid dependone way or another on the size and composition of thepopulation.

Concluding remarks

The underlying assumption of the discussion has beenthat the social and economic consequences of rapidpopulation growth tend to be negative. There are those,of course, who continue to argue otherwise, who keepon hoping that rapid population growth may lead to or beaccompanied by technological breakthroughs or otherquasi-miracles. But historical and recent evidence conti-nue to nullify their arguments. It seems more reasonableto expect that "miracles" are more likely to occur wherethe conditions have been set than otherwise.

We have attempted to project our vision to 2000 A.D.because the long-run implications of population growthare more momentous than the short-run. The conse-quences of demographic processes cumulate exponen-

Pernia 151

tially over time (as shown by the data), while theprospects for development crucially hinge on the qualityof the next generation. Deservedly, therefore, the year2000 has become the new focus of research and,hopefully, of policy as well.

REFERENCES

Abrera, Ma. Alcestis (1975). "Philippine Poverty Thres-holds." Measuring Philippine Development. Develop-ment Academy of the Philippines.

Barlis, Mindanilla (1975). "Preliminary Projections ofGNP and Income Inequality in the Year 2000."PREPF Phase I Report, University of the PhilippinesSchool of Economics (August).

Bautista, Romeo M. (1974). "Population and Govern-ment Expenditures." Studies in Philippine Economic-Demographic Relationships. IEDR, University of thePhilippines School of Economics, pp. 200-235.

Boulier, Bryan L. (1975), "The Effects of DemographicVariables on Income Distribution." Discussion PaperNo. 61, Research Program in Economic Development.Princeton University (May).

Cabigon, Josefina V. (1975). "Patterns, Trends, andDifferentials in Household Headship in the Philip-pines." Research Note No. 67, University of thePhilippines Population Institute.

Corsa, L., Jr. and Oakley, D. (1971). "Consequence ofPopulation Growth for Health Services in LessDeveloped Countries." Chapter 10 in NAS RapidPopulation Growth. Baltimore: The Johns HopkinsPress, 1971.

Domingo, Lita J. (1975). "Labor Force Projections:AssumDtions of Constant Activity Rates." ResearchNote No. 80, University of the Philippines PopulationInstitute.

152 IMPLICATIONS OF POPULATION GROWTH

Keyfitz, Nathan (1971). "On the Momentum of Popula-tion Growth." Demography, 8:71-80 (February).

Mangahas, Mahar K. (1974). Family Size as a Deter-minant of Family Expenditure," Studies in PhilippineEconomic Demographic Relationships. IEDR, Univer-sity of the Philippines School of Economics, pp.236-275.

Mangahas, Mahar K.(1974). "Income Inequality in thePhilippines: A Decomposition Analysis." IEDR Dis-cussion Paper 74-15, University of the PhilippinesSchool of Economics (November).

Mangahas, Mahar K. (1975). "The Measurement ofPhilippine National Welfare," Measuring PhilippineDevelopment. Development Academy of the Philip-pines.

Pearson, Lester B. (1969). Partners in Development,Report of the Commission on International Develop-ment. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Pernia, Ernesto M. (1976). "Population Growth andUrbanization." Population of the Philippines. ESCAPMonograph.

THE POPULATION OF THE PHILIPPINES - CICREDcicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-c42.pdfPreface AN...

Documents

Transcript of THE POPULATION OF THE PHILIPPINES - CICREDcicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-c42.pdfPreface AN...